Menu

Test Charts / Auto Bild Sportscars

2022 AutoBild 19 Inch Summer UHP Tire Test

Compare each discipline in the tested size. See the measured result, position and gap to the best tire, then read the verdict for the trade-offs behind the finishing order.

Tested size
245/40 R19
Tires tested
10
Disciplines
9

Read the measurements, not just the rank

Lower is better for braking distances and lap times; higher is better for subjective scores and aquaplaning speed. Bars start at zero. Read the gap alongside the position: adjacent tires can be separated by very different margins.

Positions and gaps always refer to the full test field within each group. Selecting tires does not recalculate rankings or change the best-in-test benchmark.

Dry

2

Dry Braking

Dry braking in feet (62 - 0 mph)

Lower is better ↓
Dry Braking
Position / TireResultGap to bestResidual speed
110 ft Best 0 mph
111 ft +1 ft 8 mph
112 ft +2 ft 9 mph
115 ft +5 ft 15 mph
116 ft +6 ft 18 mph
116 ft +6 ft 19 mph
117 ft +7 ft 19 mph
119 ft +9 ft 22 mph
120 ft +10 ft 23 mph
127 ft +17 ft 29 mph

The difference between best and worst was 15.2% (17 ft ≈ 1.1 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Star Performer UHP 3 would still be travelling at 29 mph when the Continental SportContact 7 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Dry Handling

Dry Handling Average Speed

Higher is better ↑
Dry Handling
Position / TireResultGap to best
74.2 mph Best
73.4 mph -0.8 mph
73.2 mph -1.0 mph
73.1 mph -1.1 mph
73.0 mph -1.2 mph
72.5 mph -1.7 mph
72.4 mph -1.8 mph
72.2 mph -2.0 mph
71.8 mph -2.4 mph
71.6 mph -2.6 mph

The difference between best and worst was 3.5% (2.6 mph).

Wet

5

Wet Braking

Wet braking in feet (62 - 0 mph)

Lower is better ↓
Wet Braking
Position / TireResultGap to bestResidual speed
162 ft Best 0 mph
171 ft +9 ft 18 mph
173 ft +11 ft 20 mph
174 ft +12 ft 21 mph
175 ft +13 ft 22 mph
182 ft +20 ft 27 mph
184 ft +22 ft 28 mph
185 ft +23 ft 28 mph
186 ft +24 ft 29 mph
231 ft +69 ft 44 mph

The difference between best and worst was 42.7% (69 ft ≈ 4.7 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Star Performer UHP 3 would still be travelling at 44 mph when the Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Wet Handling

Wet Handling Average Speed

Higher is better ↑
Wet Handling
Position / TireResultGap to best
46.7 mph Best
46.7 mph Best
46.5 mph -0.2 mph
45.5 mph -1.2 mph
45.3 mph -1.4 mph
45.1 mph -1.6 mph
44.9 mph -1.8 mph
44.9 mph -1.8 mph
44.0 mph -2.7 mph
40.1 mph -6.6 mph

The difference between best and worst was 14% (6.6 mph).

Wet Circle

Wet Circle Lap Time in seconds

Lower is better ↓
Wet Circle
Position / TireResultGap to best
11.34 s Best
11.35 s +0.01 s
11.36 s +0.02 s
11.58 s +0.24 s
11.63 s +0.29 s
11.66 s +0.32 s
11.71 s +0.37 s
11.91 s +0.57 s
12.01 s +0.67 s
12.37 s +1.03 s

The difference between best and worst was 9.1% (1.03 s).

Straight Aqua

Float Speed in mph

Higher is better ↑
Straight Aqua
Position / TireResultGap to best
58.8 mph Best
58.3 mph -0.5 mph
57.9 mph -0.9 mph
57.8 mph -1.0 mph
57.5 mph -1.3 mph
57.4 mph -1.4 mph
57.4 mph -1.4 mph
57.3 mph -1.5 mph
56.8 mph -2.0 mph
56.7 mph -2.1 mph

The difference between best and worst was 3.6% (2.1 mph).

Curved Aquaplaning

Remaining lateral acceleration

Higher is better ↑
Curved Aquaplaning
Position / TireResultGap to best
9.7 ft/s² Best
9.7 ft/s² 0.0 ft/s²
9.1 ft/s² -0.6 ft/s²
9.0 ft/s² -0.7 ft/s²
9.0 ft/s² -0.7 ft/s²
9.0 ft/s² -0.7 ft/s²
8.8 ft/s² -0.9 ft/s²
8.6 ft/s² -1.1 ft/s²
8.5 ft/s² -1.2 ft/s²
8.2 ft/s² -1.5 ft/s²

The difference between best and worst was 15.5% (1.5 ft/s²).

Comfort

1

Noise

External noise in dB

Lower is better ↓
Noise
Position / TireResultGap to best
70.6 dB Best
70.7 dB +0.10 dB
70.8 dB +0.20 dB
71.6 dB +1.00 dB
71.7 dB +1.10 dB
71.7 dB +1.10 dB
72 dB +1.40 dB
72.8 dB +2.20 dB
72.9 dB +2.30 dB
73.6 dB +3.00 dB

The difference between best and worst was 4.2% (3 dB).

Value

1

Rolling Resistance

Rolling resistance in kg t

Lower is better ↓
Rolling Resistance
Position / TireResultGap to bestExtra fuel / year
7.86 kg/t Best $0
8.29 kg/t +0.43 kg/t $16
8.48 kg/t +0.62 kg/t $23
8.59 kg/t +0.73 kg/t $27
8.64 kg/t +0.78 kg/t $29
8.69 kg/t +0.83 kg/t $31
9.01 kg/t +1.15 kg/t $43
9.04 kg/t +1.18 kg/t $44
9.28 kg/t +1.42 kg/t $53
9.51 kg/t +1.65 kg/t $62

The difference between best and worst was 21% (1.65 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Vredestein Ultrac Vorti+ uses about 17 gal ($62) more fuel than the Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions. These calculators use the full test field, independently of your tire selection above.

12,000 mi
$3.60/gal
Estimates based on typical driving conditions. Rolling resistance accounts for approximately 20% of IC vehicle fuel consumption and 25% of EV energy consumption. Actual savings vary based on driving style, vehicle weight, road conditions, and tire age. For comparative purposes only. Lifetime savings based on a 40,000km / 25,000 mile tread life.

Test setup & methodology

The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.

Recorded test conditions

Recorded test conditions

Dry Braking
62.1 → 0.0 mph
Wet Braking
62.1 → 0.0 mph

More tire tests

Cross-check this test

All tire tests

Where these tires were tested again, and how the verdict held up.

Rate your tires

My tires

Saved in this browser on this site. No account needed. Clearing browser data removes your choices.

Vehicle and size

Check the size, load and speed ratings on your vehicle. Saving a size does not confirm fitment.

Saved tires

Save tires from a tire page, test or comparison to keep them here.

Select 2–8 saved tires. Ranked comparisons require at least two shared tests.