The Michelin Pilot Sport 5 is new to market, but so is its main rival, the Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6!
To find out which of these new ultra high performance tires are best, I use a VW Golf GTI wearing 225/45 R17 tires and test the dry, wet, comfort, noise and rolling resistance of nine sets of performance tires, to see if the new PS5 or Asym 6 can retain their crowns as two of the best tires on the market, or whether another brand of tire will prove to be best!
Test setup & methodology
The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.
Show full testing methodology
Recorded test conditions
- Dry Braking
- 62.1 → 0.6 mph
- Wet Braking
- 49.7 → 0.6 mph
Score Weighting
Weights express the scoring priorities, not how much each discipline actually changed the finishing order. The size of the performance gaps matters too. Category weights contribute to the overall score. Within each category, discipline weights divide that category’s share. Published finishing positions also need to be read alongside the editorial verdict.
| Test | Within category | Share of overall score |
|---|---|---|
| Dry · 35% | ||
| Dry Braking | 45% | 15.75% |
| Dry Handling | 40% | 14% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 15% | 5.25% |
| Wet · 50% | ||
| Wet Braking | 40% | 20% |
| Wet Handling | 35% | 17.5% |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 15% | 7.5% |
| Straight Aqua | 10% | 5% |
| Comfort · 5% | ||
| Subj. Comfort | 50% | 2.5% |
| Noise | 50% | 2.5% |
| Value · 10% | ||
| Rolling Resistance | 100% | 10% |
Our standard methods
The conditions above are recorded for this test. The descriptions below explain our standard procedures; measurement windows and run counts can vary by test.
Dry Braking
For dry braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 110 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on clean, dry asphalt. I typically use an 100–5 km/h measurement window. My standard programme is five runs per tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tires are run repeatedly throughout the session to correct for changing conditions.
Dry Handling
For dry handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible so I can assess the tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tires so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable. For more track-focused products, I also do endurance testing, which is a set number of laps at race pace to determine tire wear patterns and heat resistance over longer driving.
Subj. Dry Handling
I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated dry handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behavior, mid-corner balance, corner-exit traction, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tire before evaluating each candidate.
Wet Braking
For wet braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 88 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on an asphalt surface with a controlled water film. I typically use an 80–5 km/h measurement window to isolate tire performance from variability in the initial brake application. My standard programme is eight runs per tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. To correct for changing conditions, I run reference tires repeatedly throughout the session — in wet testing, typically every three candidate test sets.
Wet Handling
For wet handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit. I generally use specialist wet circuits with kerb-watering systems designed to maintain a consistent surface condition. ESC is disabled where possible so I can assess the tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tires so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable.
Subj. Wet Handling
I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated wet handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behavior, mid-corner balance, aquaplaning resistance, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tire before evaluating each candidate.
Straight Aqua
To measure straight-line aquaplaning resistance, I drive one side of the vehicle through a water trough of controlled depth, typically around 7 mm, while the opposite side remains on dry pavement. I enter at a fixed speed and then accelerate progressively. I define aquaplaning onset as the point at which the wheel travelling through the water exceeds a specified slip threshold relative to the dry-side reference wheel. I usually perform four runs per tire set and average the valid results.
Subj. Comfort
To assess comfort, I drive on a wide range of road surfaces (often dedicated comfort tracks at test facilities) at speeds from 50 to 120 km/h, including smooth motorway, coarse surfaces, expansion joints, broken pavement, and sharp-edged obstacles. I evaluate primary ride quality, secondary ride quality, impact harshness, seat-transmitted vibration, and the tire's ability to absorb sharp inputs. Ratings are assigned on a 1–10 scale relative to the reference tire.
Noise
I measure external pass-by noise in accordance with UNECE Regulation 117 and ISO 13325 using the coast-by method on a compliant test surface. Calibrated microphones are positioned beside the test lane, and the vehicle coasts through the measurement zone under controlled conditions. I record the maximum A-weighted sound pressure level in dB(A), complete multiple runs over the relevant speed range, and normalise the result to the reference speed required by the procedure.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance is measured under controlled laboratory conditions in accordance with ISO 28580 and UNECE Regulation 117 Annex 6. The tire is mounted on a test wheel and loaded against a large-diameter steel drum. After thermal stabilisation at the prescribed test speed, rolling resistance force is measured at the spindle and corrected according to the relevant procedure. The result is expressed as rolling resistance coefficient, typically in kg/tonne.
Dry
I'm going to start with dry, as let's face it, that's what everyone is here for! These are UHP tires and we care what they feel like to drive fast with!
Only two tires were in the 94 second range, and that was the Semperit and the budget Rotalla. While their times were similar, the Rotalla slightly ahead on pace, the Semperit definitely had the edge subjectively, but both had significant delays in steering response with high levels of understeer and low feedback compared to the best, with the Rotalla having the least feedback of the group.
Next up was the Bridgestone and Hankook, I'm glad these two are together on time as they were subjectively surprisingly close. Both tires immediately felt soft coming out of the garage, the steering was lighter, you needed more steering angle to get the car turned, and you could feel the car moving around on the sidewalls of the tires just coming off the ramps.
Once up to speed on track, both tires had high levels of understeer, once they were sliding they took a long time to recover, and both tires gave up all their grip on the first lap then started getting too hot and lost about a second a lap. The Hankook was consistently very good on the brakes, where the Bridgestone seemed to struggle even more, especially when trying to brake and turn. It was just vague and imprecise. But it's a touring tire, so let's not make it feel bad about itself. It is of course some of the most comfortable dry handling laps I've ever done.
The Giti was next in fifth place and the first tire of the group I'd actually call sporty! It had nice positive steering and was well balanced, grip seemed good laterally but perhaps a little weaker on the brakes, we'll see in the braking results.
The new Michelin Pilot Sport 5 was fourth, but we are only 1.28 seconds away from the fastest tire now. It seemed to pick up exactly where the Pilot Sport 4 left off - easy to drive, safe understeer balance, GREAT levels of grip… but just not that sporty. To be fair to Michelin, even though the tire has the word sport in its name, they never claim to be a tire which should be used on track, they have the 4S line for that, but I am a little disappointed there isn't a little more… sport from the pilot SPORT 5. It wasn't quite at the Hankook or Bridgestone levels, but it wasn't at the level of the best in terms of steering feel and response.
One tire that definitely deserves sport in its name is the Yokohama Advan Sport V105, as it finished an impressive third and was one of the best in terms of steering and sportyness. The steering was well weighed, quick and linear, the car was playful and I really enjoyed being back on this tire in the dry, as it's been a long time since I've driven it and this is the first time I've tested it against rivals! It's an old tire now, and technically already replaced by the v107, but a great tire in the dry.
Goodyear managed second place overall, it had the fastest first lap pace, nice sporty feeling steering response and felt like a weapon on the brakes, with the average of the three laps just 0.2 seconds slower than the best. As always with Goodyear tires, it was a real pleasure to drive and I'm glad Goodyear have retained this for the new product.
But the fastest tire, and the most sporty was ironically once again one of the few tires without the word sport, F1, race etc in its name, the Continental PremiumContact 6. I was really happy this tire performed well again, I had my suspicions it was the Conti when testing as it had excellent dynamic steering with a nice weight, really quick sharp reactions, and great levels of grip across the three laps. The PremiumContact 6 might be getting on in its years, but it's still totally fabulous as a dry handling tire!
Dry Handling
Dry handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 91.2 s | Best | |
| 91.35 s | +0.15 s | |
| 92.07 s | +0.87 s | |
| 92.48 s | +1.28 s | |
| 92.81 s | +1.61 s | |
| 93.01 s | +1.81 s | |
| 93.58 s | +2.38 s | |
| 93.76 s | +2.56 s | |
| 93.92 s | +2.72 s |
All the tires in the Dry Handling test finished less than 3% apart.
The new Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 had an impressive lead in dry braking, with the Rotalla struggling to stop the Golf.
Dry Braking
Dry braking in feet (62 - 1 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 107 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 108 ft | +1 ft | 9 mph | |
| 109 ft | +2 ft | 11 mph | |
| 110 ft | +3 ft | 13 mph | |
| 112 ft | +5 ft | 17 mph | |
| 112 ft | +5 ft | 17 mph | |
| 115 ft | +8 ft | 21 mph | |
| 115 ft | +8 ft | 22 mph | |
| 118 ft | +11 ft | 25 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 10.7% (11 ft ≈ 0.8 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Rotalla RU01 S Pace would still be travelling at 25 mph when the Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
Wet
As wet grip is so important for tires, and I had a little spare time, I actually ran wet handling twice, once using a Golf 8 GTI and again on a Golf 7 GTI in reverse order, then averaged out the two sets of times. Fortunately there were almost no changes in position, other than when mere fractions of a second separated sets, and trust me, some of these tires are close!
The slowest tire in the wet was once again the Rotalla. It didn't actually handle that badly, almost no aquaplaning, I've certainly driven worse, but the limit of grip was peaky meaning once you were sliding it was tricky to recover, and the braking felt really poor.
The Giti was way ahead of the rotalla, just 2.2% off the best and like in the dry a really nice tire to drive, good feeling progressive steering, no aquaplaning, it was just missing a little grip of the best laterally and on the brakes.
As in last years 18" test, the sporty Continental PremiumContact 6 struggled slightly in wet handling, as did the Yokohama. Both these tires were only two percent off the leaders, but their ultimate grip levels couldn't match the best. If anything, it felt like Conti had a little more grip of the two so I'm assuming it will do better in wet braking, but there was too much lateral aquaplaning. The Yokohama had less issues with lateral aquaplaning so was easier to drive as long as all four tires were the same temperature, but it did seem to like a bit of warmth more than the rest of the tires meaning for the second lap, where the fronts were warmer than the rears, there was some oversteer.
Fifth and fourth were the Hankook and Bridgestone pair again, and if you're a fan of understeer, these are the tires for you. They were both easy to drive at the limit as the limit was all front end so no surprises, you just had to be really patient with the turning and throttle. Like in the dry they both featured slower steering and less feedback.
The Semperit might have struggled in the dry but it was EXCELLENT in the wet, with almost no aquaplaning in a straight line or while turning, and great grip. The Semperit is picking up where the uniroyal rainsport left off, both are sister brands run by Continental, and it had that familiar soft steering and good wet grip the rainsport always has.
The final two tires are, who'd have guessed, Michelin and Goodyear. While the times were very close, the delivery was quite different! As in the dry, the Goodyear was noticeably the sportier feeling with quicker steering, better feedback and a sharper front end, but the goodyear certainly had more aquaplaning of the two, especially in a straight line! The Michelin was a more relaxing drive, one of the easiest tires to drive fast and had buckets of grip, but like with the PS4 it was slightly numb grip. On both cars the Asym 6 had the slightly faster one lap pace and the fastest ideal time across the five sectors, but both times the average of the 4 laps was in Michelin favor as the tire was more consistent over the run.
When everything was combined together and averaged, the result were as close as they could be, with both tires again having totally different personalities, but ending up in a similar place.
Wet Handling
Wet handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 64.02 s | Best | |
| 64.08 s | +0.06 s | |
| 64.09 s | +0.07 s | |
| 64.53 s | +0.51 s | |
| 64.81 s | +0.79 s | |
| 65.09 s | +1.07 s | |
| 65.3 s | +1.28 s | |
| 65.45 s | +1.43 s | |
| 67.4 s | +3.38 s |
The difference between best and worst was 5.3% (3.38 s).
Hankook once again aced wet braking, stopping the Golf a full 5 feet shorter than the Continental in second place. Michelin and Goodyear were close in third and fourth.
Wet Braking
Wet braking in feet (50 - 1 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 94 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 99 ft | +5 ft | 18 mph | |
| 103 ft | +9 ft | 24 mph | |
| 103 ft | +9 ft | 25 mph | |
| 106 ft | +12 ft | 27 mph | |
| 111 ft | +17 ft | 32 mph | |
| 114 ft | +20 ft | 34 mph | |
| 129 ft | +35 ft | 42 mph | |
| 130 ft | +36 ft | 42 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 39.3% (36 ft ≈ 2.5 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Rotalla RU01 S Pace would still be travelling at 42 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.
The new Michelin Pilot Sport 5 had an impressive straight aquaplaning performance, leading the pack where the new Asymmetric 6 struggled.
Straight Aqua
Float Speed in mph
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 54.3 mph | Best | |
| 54.1 mph | -0.2 mph | |
| 54.0 mph | -0.3 mph | |
| 53.9 mph | -0.4 mph | |
| 53.3 mph | -1.0 mph | |
| 53.2 mph | -1.1 mph | |
| 53.2 mph | -1.1 mph | |
| 52.3 mph | -2.0 mph | |
| 52.0 mph | -2.3 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 4.3% (2.3 mph).
Environment
The Goodyear had the lowest passby noise of the group, with the Rotalla and Giti also performing very well. I'm a little surprised at the Bridgestone being the noisiest of the group given its category, but we tested noise at two speeds (50 and 50 mph) and it was the noisiest both times.
Noise
External noise in dB
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 67.8 dB | Best | |
| 68.9 dB | +1.10 dB | |
| 69 dB | +1.20 dB | |
| 69.2 dB | +1.40 dB | |
| 69.7 dB | +1.90 dB | |
| 70.7 dB | +2.90 dB | |
| 71.5 dB | +3.70 dB | |
| 71.8 dB | +4.00 dB | |
| 72.5 dB | +4.70 dB |
The difference between best and worst was 6.9% (4.7 dB).
I did get time to run some comfort testing, not a full program but a reasonable cut down program using some rough roads and impact bars, and as usual there was a loose correlation between handling and comfort. The best of the group in terms of rounding off the harsh impacts like potholes was naturally the Bridgestone, but the Michelin, Semperit and Rotalla were up there too. The Goodyear, Hankook and Giti were a little below, and the Conti and Yokohama were the most noticeably firm. I'd only really call the final two marginally uncomfortable tires, the rest I'm sure you'd be happy with.
Subj. Comfort
Subjective Comfort Score
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 10 Points | Best | |
| 9.8 Points | -0.20 Points | |
| 9.5 Points | -0.50 Points | |
| 9.5 Points | -0.50 Points | |
| 9 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 9 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points | |
| 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points | |
| 8 Points | -2.00 Points |
The difference between best and worst was 20% (2 Points).
Bridgestone had a significant lead in rolling resistance, I knew it would be good given its category, but wow. The best UHP tire, which was the Goodyear, was 18% lower. That said, given the grip levels from the Goodyear in the dry and wet the Goodyear is doing an amazing job, as is Michelin. Yokohama is showing its age in this test as it was way off the best, I'm sure the V107 improves this.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance in kg t
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Extra fuel / year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7.01 kg/t | Best | $0 | |
| 8.48 kg/t | +1.47 kg/t | $62 | |
| 8.81 kg/t | +1.80 kg/t | $75 | |
| 8.84 kg/t | +1.83 kg/t | $77 | |
| 8.85 kg/t | +1.84 kg/t | $77 | |
| 9.06 kg/t | +2.05 kg/t | $86 | |
| 9.07 kg/t | +2.06 kg/t | $86 | |
| 9.33 kg/t | +2.32 kg/t | $97 | |
| 10.15 kg/t | +3.14 kg/t | $132 |
The difference between best and worst was 44.8% (3.14 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Yokohama Advan Sport V105 uses about 37 gal ($132) more fuel than the Bridgestone Turanza T005.
Adjust the assumptions
Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.
Results
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
225/45 R17 91Y
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (10)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 107 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 91.35 s | +0.15 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9.5 Points | -0.50 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 103 ft | +9 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 64.02 s | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 52.3 mph | -2.0 mph |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 9 Points | -1.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 1st / 9 | 67.8 dB | Best in this discipline |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 8.48 kg/t | +1.47 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/69
- Weight
- 8.98 kgs
- Tread
- 7.1 mm
Michelin Pilot Sport 5
225/45 R17 94Y XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (10)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 109 ft | +2 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 92.48 s | +1.28 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 8.8 Points | -1.20 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 103 ft | +9 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 64.08 s | +0.06 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 10 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 54.3 mph | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 2nd / 9 | 9.8 Points | -0.20 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 6th / 9 | 70.7 dB | +2.90 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 4th / 9 | 8.84 kg/t | +1.83 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/72
- Weight
- 9.48 kgs
- Tread
- 7.6 mm
Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3
225/45 R17 94Y XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (10)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 108 ft | +1 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 93.01 s | +1.81 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 8 Points | -2.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 94 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 64.81 s | +0.79 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 53.2 mph | -1.1 mph |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 4th / 9 | 69.2 dB | +1.40 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 7th / 9 | 9.07 kg/t | +2.06 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/72
- Weight
- 9.9 kgs
- Tread
- 8.1 mm
Continental Premium Contact 6
225/45 R17 94Y XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (10)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 110 ft | +3 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 91.2 s | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 10 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 99 ft | +5 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 65.3 s | +1.28 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 53.3 mph | -1.0 mph |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 7th / 9 | 71.5 dB | +3.70 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 6th / 9 | 9.06 kg/t | +2.05 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/72
- Weight
- 9.44 kgs
- Tread
- 7.5 mm
Bridgestone Turanza T005
225/45 R17 91W
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (10)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 112 ft | +5 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 93.58 s | +2.38 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 7.5 Points | -2.50 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 111 ft | +17 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 64.53 s | +0.51 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 52.0 mph | -2.3 mph |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 10 Points | Best in this discipline |
| NoiseLower is better | 9th / 9 | 72.5 dB | +4.70 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 1st / 9 | 7.01 kg/t | Best in this discipline |
- EU Label
- B/A/71
- Weight
- 8 kgs
- Tread
- 7.7 mm
Semperit Speed Life 3
225/45 R17 91Y
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (10)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 115 ft | +8 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 93.92 s | +2.72 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 8 Points | -2.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 106 ft | +12 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 64.09 s | +0.07 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 10 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 54.0 mph | -0.3 mph |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9.5 Points | -0.50 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 5th / 9 | 69.7 dB | +1.90 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 8.81 kg/t | +1.80 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/72
- Weight
- 9.16 kgs
- Tread
- 8.6 mm
Yokohama Advan Sport V105
225/45 R17 94Y XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (10)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 112 ft | +5 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 92.07 s | +0.87 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 2nd / 9 | 9.8 Points | -0.20 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 114 ft | +20 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 65.09 s | +1.07 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 53.2 mph | -1.1 mph |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 8 Points | -2.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 8th / 9 | 71.8 dB | +4.00 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 9th / 9 | 10.15 kg/t | +3.14 kg/t |
- EU Label
- D/A/72
- Weight
- 9.96 kgs
- Tread
- 7.7 mm
Giti GitiSportS2
225/45 R17 94Y XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (10)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 115 ft | +8 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 92.81 s | +1.61 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 9 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 129 ft | +35 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 65.45 s | +1.43 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 2nd / 9 | 54.1 mph | -0.2 mph |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 9 Points | -1.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 69 dB | +1.20 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 5th / 9 | 8.85 kg/t | +1.84 kg/t |
- EU Label
- D/A/70
- Weight
- 9.44 kgs
- Tread
- 7.8 mm
Rotalla RU01 S Pace
225/45 R17 94Y XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (10)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 118 ft | +11 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 93.76 s | +2.56 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 130 ft | +36 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 67.4 s | +3.38 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 7.5 Points | -2.50 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 53.9 mph | -0.4 mph |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9.5 Points | -0.50 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 68.9 dB | +1.10 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 8th / 9 | 9.33 kg/t | +2.32 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/69
- Weight
- 9.46 kgs
- Tread
- 7.5 mm
Hi, thank you for your fantastic reviews and advice. I’ll soon be looking to replace the Yokahama V105 tires on my SL. I’ve been very happy with these but looking for better wet performance.
Unfortunately the rears are a rare size 285/30/r19 Thinking of Asymmetric 5s, but would be grateful for any advice.
Thanks Mark
Asym5 is one of my fav tires so always a good choice!
Thanks for the great reviews. I’ll soon be looking to replace the Yokohama V105 tires on my SL. I’ve been happy with these but looking to get better wet performance. Unfortunately the rears are quite a rare size 285/30/r19
Thinking of replacing with Asymmetric 5. Would this be a good choice? And what else should I consider.
Thank you Mark
A bit of an oddball perhaps - i’m looking to replace 9 year old Pirellis on my almost daily driven ‘85 911 Targa. It’s a set of 16” 205/55 and 225/50. Having searched all possibilities in Belgium, the shortlist comes down to Pilot Sport 4, PremiumContact6 and V105.
V105 is by far the cheapest, others quite similar. Now the 911 is a naturally slightly understeery beast with very light front end - so in my understanding this calls more for a solid sidewall tire, right? At the same time, the suspension is not something you’d call sophisticated or supple - so would Michelin’s comfort vs the other 2 make a significant difference in overall ride quality as the roads are not the very best over here in Belgium - but also, i suspect the difference is bigger in 18” than in 16” where there is a lot of sidewall or am i mistaken?
I’m not after just ultimate grip, as it’s quite nice being able to have a controlled powerslide but at less than suicidal speeds… what would be your suggestion here?
Many thanks!
Good short list, but I'm afraid I can't answer your question based on experience as I've not tested the V105 in 16" and 16" tires are often built differently from their 17/18 inch brothers.
I know what I'd fit, the Conti just because I always like that tire no matter the size, but I do prioritize handling over comfort.
Also, very cool daily.
Many thanks man! Conti it will be then - German for a German car 😄
I drive a modded 2001 E39 525d. I just bought 18" wheels and will buy 235/40R18 front, 265/35R18 rear tires next week. I'm looking for a tire that is sportier & grippier than a touring tire, but still comfortable and quiet enough for my type of usage. I use the car as a daily and also do multiple long range (1000 km) trips per year with it (25-30k km per year). I basically want the car to still be able to attack twisty mountain roads, but the main thing I look for in the tire is that it should be good at high speeds, it should be quiet, and not have too harsh of a ride. It should also have short braking distances, and good wet performance, as my region gets a lot of rain.
I wanted to get the Michelin PS5 but then I realized that they are stupidly expensive in my country (Turkey). The next tire that I looked at is the Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 and it's 50% cheaper than the PS5. I also know that the Hankooks are OE tires on a lot of cars, including a 2021 BMW 520d xDrive that a relative owns, and he says he was happy with them and that they lasted him 40,000 km.
Do you think I should go with the Hankooks? As long as they're still sportier than a touring tire, and have enough grip on the rear axle for my 500-600 Nm of torque (modded M57), those seem like the perfect tire for me. Or are there any alternatives that you could recommend considering my requirements?
Good tires, but maybe they'll have quite high wear on the rear. The Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5/6 are great options.
I just found out that I could also get PS4 for a good price. They would cost me 20% more than the Hankooks while the PS5 would cost me 50% more. Does the PS5 just have improved wear over the PS4?
Also, now that you mentioned the Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 I looked them up online for my sizes and could find extremely well priced ones for my fronts, but no luck with the rears for some reason. I could always ask local tire shops if they have some in stock or could order some for me, though
Yes, the PS5 should wear more than 20% better than the PS4, and has the nice sidewall so that's a plus.
Looking at recent tests the Asymmetric 6 is wearing even better than the PS5. If you can still get the Asymmetric 5 for a good price that's also a good option
Nevermind, I went to multiple tire shops in my city today and was able to find a set of PS5 in my sizes for an unbeatable price, 13250 Turkish Liras (650€) including mounting & balancing.
The PS4 would cost 12000 TL but that is an online price, so mounting & balancing is not included. Also, the longevity of the PS5 makes it cheaper in the long run than the PS4. And the PS4s I found were made in 2021, unlike the PS5s which were made this year.
I'll be buying them tomorrow, so I'm super excited! The tires I had on before were a square setup of 235/45R17 Falken Azenis FK510. I was happy with those for their price but the rubber felt like it became hard quite quickly, and they lasted around 30k km. Dry braking & noise became worse with wear. Eager to see how different the PS5s will be in 235/40R18 front and 265/35R18 rear!
Let me know how you like them :)
I've driven a bit on them already, and wow, I knew it was a good tire but I did not expect this. I went from 17" to 18" and have MORE comfort now. It's just such a refined ride both in terms of ride quality but also noise. And on top of this they have a lot more grip than my Falkens did, or at least they feel like they are easier to drive fast, as they provide you with a lot of confidence because their limit is very progressive. The car is also noticeably upset less by road grooves, lane markings etc, so driving fast in a straight line feels a lot more stable.
We also had monsoon-like rain yesterday, and WOW, this is the best tire I've ever experienced in the wet. Felt like I was driving in the dry. I was literally driving through standing water on purpose and there was never even a hint of aquaplaning.
SUPER glad I made this purchase. 100% worth their money and the sidewall design just makes the entire car look so much better!
This feels like the perfect tire choice for a 5 series with sport suspension. Perfect mix of comfort & sportiness imo.
:D glad you love them, if you could put a review on the site it'll be more visible :)
It looks difficult to compare the tires based on a full change of wheels and fitment, isn’t it. As you say you went from square 17” to 18” non square, so I believed you changed the the rims and the height of the tire wall, which obviously change the behavior of the car. I am also leaning towards PS5 since they are very close in price to the Primacy 4+ version. Coming from Dunlop Sport Maxx RT2 MO….I am not sure where to aim….
I've noticed that overal the price difference between the winning premium brands and the so called 'second tier' or non premium cheaper brands isn't always that huge. For instance, for my car I'd save 20-25 euro's per tire for going to Falken instead of the Goodyear AS6. Even if I buy 4 tires at once, i can't even fill me gas tank twice for the savings.
Is there any tire in particular that is considerably less expensive than the premium big name brands, that really stood out to you or surprised you?
Unfortunately it's very rare, the fact is it's expensive to make a good tire, and as soon as manufacturers are making good tires their price increases.
Some Hankook products can still be found at near tier 2 prices with test winning performances.
great reviews as usual Jonathan but other tire tests for the goodyear say its good for aquaplaning ? i guess it is good but not the best !
Asym 5 was better than 6, not sure if that's the difference?
I have a 2.0TSi Scirocco on 235/40R18s, currently standard but possibly looking at a remap in the summer to go to about 280bhp. I need to replace all four tires and I've always been a Michelin fan boy, but in these tighter economical times i'm considering the Asymmetric 6s as there doesn't appear to be much between them in the reviews? However, making it even harder, a friend has recommended the Uniroyal Rainsport 5s and they are cheaper by far than both other options. I'm confused and conflicted! Is it worth forking out on the PS5s or will the Rainsports perform on the road as well as my wallet? Or do I meet in the middle and go for Goodyears!?
Avoid the rainsports if you like driving, they're too spongy. I'd be more than happy with the Asym 6 if it's more wallet friendly!
Thanks for the excellent test, as always!
I think it would be *very* useful to test tires halfway down their tread life too. Tires are obviously always tested brand new but this is only a relatively short part of their lifespan. During the lifespan of a tire, the performance changes/deteriorates. Often significantly. Some manufacturers seem to put more importance on this aspect than others. A 'halfway down' test might (likely will) surface interesting outcomes.
It would be useful, but to do it properly they need to be worn on the road which is VERY expensive.
I drive a 2013 Hyundai i30 and am using it for Ubering. Will be in need of new tires shortly in this size (225/45 R17) after getting around 50K kms from the stock Hankooks, so was very interested to see the results of your test. Given I mostly drive around town and would prioritize fuel efficiency and safety (I realise they can go against each other) and noise, would you have a recommendation? Was actually thinking of getting some Pirelli P7 but noticed Pirellis werent tested here so not sure where they'd fit. Appreciate any advice at all! Cheers.
HI i own a bmw 520i 2018. I urgently need to get rid of my RFTs. I am super confused between Michelin pilot sport 5 and Primacy 4 plus. Or is there anything better that you would recommend, My main interest is definitely noise level and comfort. Also to add in live in Dubai so not much of wet days or winter either, Its mostly Hot weather and Super hot weather.
Primacy 4+ if you want comfort. I have a video comparing both on youtube
Thank you for your feedback
Driver of an old corvette 2000, used at legal speeds mostly in city and little bit on highway 8kkm in summer tires and 2kkm in winter tires. Need to change my summer Dunlop RT maxx front 245/45-17 20kkm. Leaning toward primacy 4+ and I am concern of aqua planning, living in south west Sweden. Why not a PS5 vs Primacy 4+?
What do you think? Saw your lastest video with both but could not conclude.
Thanks!
The Primacy 4+ certainly isn't the best tire in its sector for aquaplaning performance, check out the data on this page https://www.tyrereviews.com... so if it's a concern maybe aim for a different tire.
ok :( the hunt shall resume ...not sure I can find the latest Bridgestone one the market nowadays ... but it looks like my Dunlop are better than the Primacy 4... hmmmm
It would be useful to repeat this test when ambient temperatures drop to a typical UK winter temperature.
Most people drive on these tires all year round, you can often find a brilliant performer in typical summer temps cant switch on in a normal winter. A test at maybe 5 degrees would be quite interesting, for example it may find if a PS4 worked better than a PS5 in the colder weather and it was the cold performance that was sacrificed for longer tire wear.
Sadly controlling the weather, especially in winter is very difficult but it is something I'm actively working on. The good news is theres TUV data on your very example, keep an eye on youtube for a video in the coming days, but in short they haven't dropped cold weather performance and Michelin is much better than competitors when cool.
That's great, thanks for the information. I will look out for that. I currently use PS4 and they have been really very good in colder weather.
Nexen N'Fera Sport SUV 225/65 R17 might be also a good choice
Hi Jonathan. Thank you for the massive effort you put in to making your comparisons. I love your reviews . The only bad thing to come of it is, that I've become fussy with what to put on next
I've been wrecking my own head with what to get.
I have a 2016 BMW 520d with pirelli 245/45 R18 96Y runflats. I love driving, So don't want the car to feel numb. I would like it to be super quiet and comfortable but also get good wear and fuel efficient too
I know it's a big ask.
I live in Dublin, Ireland so we get very mild weather. Usually damp and cold in winter
Should I come away from the runflats and do I need to go to the all season tires.
I was thinking P7 sf2 or cross climate 2 if I decide on all season.
Or a summer tire of your recommendation.
I understand you get tonnes of messages like this
,but I just can't decide. Please help me.
Thanks and keep up the great work
All season = numb.
If you're ditching the runflats, which I'm sure will be summer tires, i'd go to the asymmetric 6.
Thanks for the quick reply Jonathan.
I have them in my basket already.
Just waiting on the word from yourself.
I'll put a review on the website once I get them fitted and tested.
Really looking forward to it now.
Thanks again for your tireless work. We are all a little smarter thanks to your reviews
Please explain this EU label differences.
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135 205/55 R17 95V XL
Same tire, same size, but two different EU labes (one has A wet braking rating, other has B).
The only differences are the tire designator number (or what ever that is): 1029267 and 1029212.
What is the difference? Are they for different markets, or what? EU labes is supposed to make it easier for the consumers, not harder...
https://image.delti.com/eu-...
https://image.delti.com/eu-...
I'm afraid I don't have that data, it might be an unmarked OE tire, I suggest dropping hankook an email!
I've sent them an email. Probably will not get any reply anyway...
No replay from them, of course...
I'll drop them a message next week and try and find out! Got a link to where you saw these? It would be useful if I could get the EAN / UPC
Thanks. I found them at these two stores in Serbia:
https://www.autogume.rs/gum...
https://www.tirendo.rs/prod...
For the second link, when you open it, scroll down and in the left corner click on the "Etiketa za gumu" tab to show the EU label.
I don't have the barcodes, unfortunately.
Thanks Jonathan for tirelessly producing high quality tire tests over the years.
From your videos I've learned that it's not just the numbers, equally important are your subjective comments on each tire tested - that's why during the covid lock down, I went back to your tests, and read every comment/respond you posted in tirereviews, and youtube.
In your tests, do you use one set of tires for all the test, or a new set for each set of test?
As tires wear over time, I'm wondering whether by using one set of tires for all the tests would better reflect real-life performance/use. I'm thinking the tests can be carried out starting with the more gentle test, and progressing to the more punishing ones. Dry handling(account for tread block flex), followed by wet handling(less tread depth after dry handling), aquaplaning, wet braking, dry braking, nose & comfort.
So far I've only seen one new versus used performance comparison, and the results were disturbing. The results in this tests confirms my experience with the 2 competitor tire brands (though different models). After about 50% used, their wet performance disappeared.
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
We generally use one set for wet and one for dry. Even gentle testing wear is very different compared to real world wear so it's not really possible to use that as a comparison. I'm always looking into doing more worn testing but it's incredibly expensive.
Have a read of today's press release from the CC2 SUV, they've worn tested in the wet and the differences aren't super different amongst the premiums. https://www.tyrereviews.com...
Golf VII TDI 1.6 DSG (225/45/17) driver here, my PremiumContact6 tires are slowly getting old (~35K Km.) and I was thinking about what to buy next. These tires are really good all-rounder, only downside in my opinion is the low comfort level on bad road conditions. I was thinking about going for Turanza T005 for very low fuel-consumption ratings, but I see many users saying that those tires are very hard and not comfortable at all... I also think that'll be a downgrade from what I have right now. I might consider Primacy 4, or just buy PremiumContact6 again... Thanks for the review. You made me decide buying Continental PremiumContact6 in the first place for my summer tires and Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 for my winter tires. No regrets at all.
The T005 will be way more comfortable than the PC6, but if you like driving also feel less sporty. If you like the PC6 but want a bit more comfort I'd suggest the Asym 6 or PS5.
Careful looking at user comments on the Turanza T005. It is a very common OEM fitment on BMW, and always the run-flat version. Users are probably commenting more about the characteristics of a run-flat combined with BMW's fixed (non-adaptive) suspensions than they are about the tire model.
Good point!
I have Skoda Octavia III estate... Until now I had dunlop sport maxx rt 225/45/R17. It's time for a change... until yesterday I thought my next set was going to be Continental Premium Contact 6.
After watching the video I'm leaning towards the new Michelin PS5 - mainly because of the comfort/noise. As I am a very gentle driver... and hate all the bumps on uneven roads, the PS5 should probably be better, right?
That is a sound conclusion :)
Audi A4 Quattro 3.2 FSI. I can't decide between the GY F1 6 or the Hankook's.
I'm not sure I like the sound of "undynamic handling" but then it's a Quattro so does it really matter? Perhaps as I'm doing motorway miles I'll be better off with the best wet braking stats.
But then rolling resistance and noise.... however anything will be better than the garbage mix of Falken's and Dunlop's it came with!
Why not the Michelin then, a mix of both!
Great test for my tire size :) , big Thanks form me for that :)
Nice to see the new Goodyear and Michelin. I was a bit surprised to see the Yokohama here, I think it´s the oldest tire in this review, it was released in 2013 if I remember correct. Not abd for this age, but the high rolling resistance is not contemporary
The first two places aren´t a surprise for me but can´t believe the Semperit is so good in wet but believe it´s weakness in the dry. Reminds on the Uniroyal-tires, bad in the dry, better in the wet, but maybe the Rainsport 5 is better on Aquaplaning than the Semperit.
Sadly some newer tires like the Vredestein Ultrac Vorti +, Pirelli P Zero SZ4 and Yokohama V107 aren´t available in this size.
I'm excited to get on the V107 sometime, I hope it feels like the 105 with added wet / rolling resistance
A question, did you test the V105 oder V105S?
Good question. It was sold as V105, and is named V105 on the sidewall however there is a small V105S too. Yokohama only list the V105 on their sites now, but I think they're all the "S" versions now?
Maybe newer versions all 105S but even in the shops it´s not clear marked, different categories in rolling resistance D, E and F for the same tire in different shops.
You can find that for compound updates and OE versions too, tire buying is a total mess when you look into it 😅
Yep, different rolling resitance labels and some OE versions. But I think some shops also to blame for less detailed description
Thanks for the test! I am looking to replace runflats on my BMW 3 touring. I really like the Asym 6, but is not available in my fronts size yet. Would you gor for the PS5, Asym 5 or wait until September to get the Asym 6? I am just worried how much sportiness I would lose with the PS5, othewise looks great.
What tire are you coming from? If you're not hitting tracks i'm sure the PS5 would be a great option if you don't want to wait
Currently on Pirelli P Zero * runflat R19 (year 2019). I’m not tracking the car, but I push it a bit on twisty roads. The ride is pretty harsh right now, so that’s also why I like the PS5, being more comfortable than the Asymetric. I could get the Asym 5 for 150€ less than PS5 though.
The only thing I will mention is moving away from a runflat you will lose dynamic handling, that's just how the hard sidewalls in rft tires work, so maybe the Asym 5 would be a slightly less shock to the system. ALL non-runflat tires will be a marked improvement in comfort!
Yes I get it, thanks! What about Asym 5 vs 6, worth the wait or marginal improvements?
There's a video on that on youtube :) https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Comparing previous 225/45 R17 tests, where raw data was shown and where the Continental PC6 was facing the Michelin PS4, I believe it's fair to extrapolate and say that the Michelin Pilot Sport 5 lost some dry and wet braking performance to its predecessor as well as a little bit of dry handling performance and steering feel. The PS5 is certainly a great tire but something was lost along the way (or traded in) to wear, according to Michelin.
I see why you think that, but I think that size worked out very well for the PC6, especially in wet braking where it performed better than anyone expected!
The data I've seen for the PS5 is that it at least matches the PS4 in everything, but has a huge increase in mileage (+40% over PS4)
I notice that the T005 91W tested is also available as 91Y, 94W, 94Y in this size. Past experience suggests that different load and speed ratings do affect how the same tire feels. Not sure why Bridgestone didn't send you their Potenza Sport 94Y though
It really can depend on the pattern and size, sometimes they're just different sidewalls. I'm not sure what differences this is.
Good point. I'm running Michelin CrossClimate+ in this size with 94W rating during winter and it feels heavy and stiff. Sadly the CC+ wasn't available with a 91 load rating at that time. It's NOT more comfortable compared to my PSS in 225/40 R18 92Y. If at all it's the opposite of that. Anyways, the Bridgestone T-005 91W tested seems stunningly light at just 8 kg, though not that untypical for a more comfort and eco oriented tire. The difference of 1,5 to 2 kg per tire should be measurable and even noticeable in acceleration (e.g. from 80 to 120 in 6th or even from 100 to 200 km/h). Again, great review, thanks for that!
In the case of the Michelin, I would have a guess that the 91 and 94 XL tires are the same tires built to the 94 standard as that's pretty common in the CC range, however the 18" size might throw that!
So, would i be a smug S-class mercedes owner who mostly cares about looks and exclusive price-tag with lots of data results backing it up (Michelin Pilotsport 5) or an overconfident Audi Quattro enjoyer who idolizes Group B rallying (Goodyear Asymmetric 6). My choice in this case is Goodyear Asymmetric 6.