Test Charts / Tire Reviews
2022/23 Tire Reviews 17 Inch Summer 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
- 225/45 R17
- Tires tested
- 9
- Disciplines
- 10
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.
Focus on your tires
Select tires to highlight them throughout the charts.
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
3Dry 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.
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.
Subj. Dry Handling
Subjective Dry Handling 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 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 8.8 Points | -1.20 Points | |
| 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points | |
| 8 Points | -2.00 Points | |
| 8 Points | -2.00 Points | |
| 7.5 Points | -2.50 Points |
The difference between best and worst was 25% (2.5 Points).
Wet
4Wet 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.
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).
Subj. Wet Handling
Subjective Wet Handling Score
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 10 Points | Best | |
| 10 Points | Best | |
| 9 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 9 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 9 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 9 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 9 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points | |
| 7.5 Points | -2.50 Points |
The difference between best and worst was 25% (2.5 Points).
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).
Comfort
2Subj. 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).
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).
Value
1Rolling 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. These calculators use the full test field, independently of your tire selection above.
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.
More tire tests
Cross-check this test
Where these tires were tested again, and how the verdict held up.
2023 Summer Tire Market Overview
225/45 R1848 tires tested
6 of these 9 tires tested again
2026 Summer Braking Super Tire Test - How do 52 Tires Perform in Wet and Dry Braking?
245/45 R1950 tires tested
4 of these 9 tires tested again
2025 Summer Tire Test Shootout
225/40 R1852 tires tested
4 of these 9 tires tested again
