Test Charts / Tire Reviews
2022/23 Tire Reviews All Season 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
- 10
- Disciplines
- 11
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
2Dry Braking
Dry braking in feet (62 - 3 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 127 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 129 ft | +2 ft | 10 mph | |
| 129 ft | +2 ft | 11 mph | |
| 130 ft | +3 ft | 12 mph | |
| 131 ft | +4 ft | 14 mph | |
| 132 ft | +5 ft | 15 mph | |
| 136 ft | +9 ft | 21 mph | |
| 136 ft | +9 ft | 21 mph | |
| 140 ft | +13 ft | 25 mph | |
| 143 ft | +16 ft | 27 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 12.7% (16 ft ≈ 1.1 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Tomket Allyear 3 would still be travelling at 27 mph when the Michelin CrossClimate 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 78.7 s | Best | |
| 78.8 s | +0.10 s | |
| 78.9 s | +0.20 s | |
| 79.3 s | +0.60 s | |
| 79.3 s | +0.60 s | |
| 79.7 s | +1.00 s | |
| 80.1 s | +1.40 s | |
| 80.2 s | +1.50 s | |
| 80.6 s | +1.90 s | |
| 80.8 s | +2.10 s |
All the tires in the Dry Handling test finished less than 3% apart.
Wet
4Wet Braking
Wet braking in feet (50 - 3 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 100 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 104 ft | +4 ft | 15 mph | |
| 105 ft | +5 ft | 17 mph | |
| 105 ft | +5 ft | 17 mph | |
| 106 ft | +6 ft | 18 mph | |
| 107 ft | +7 ft | 20 mph | |
| 109 ft | +9 ft | 23 mph | |
| 118 ft | +18 ft | 31 mph | |
| 120 ft | +20 ft | 33 mph | |
| 135 ft | +35 ft | 40 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 34.4% (35 ft ≈ 2.3 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Tomket Allyear 3 would still be travelling at 40 mph when the Vredestein Quatrac Pro 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 96.6 s | Best | |
| 97.1 s | +0.50 s | |
| 97.5 s | +0.90 s | |
| 97.7 s | +1.10 s | |
| 98.1 s | +1.50 s | |
| 98.6 s | +2.00 s | |
| 99 s | +2.40 s | |
| 100.3 s | +3.70 s | |
| 101.3 s | +4.70 s | |
| 108.6 s | +12.00 s |
The difference between best and worst was 12.4% (12 s).
Straight Aqua
Float Speed in mph
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 50.0 mph | Best | |
| 49.3 mph | -0.7 mph | |
| 49.0 mph | -1.0 mph | |
| 49.0 mph | -1.0 mph | |
| 48.7 mph | -1.3 mph | |
| 48.5 mph | -1.5 mph | |
| 48.4 mph | -1.6 mph | |
| 47.8 mph | -2.2 mph | |
| 46.0 mph | -4.0 mph | |
| 44.8 mph | -5.2 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 10.4% (5.2 mph).
Curved Aquaplaning
Remaining lateral acceleration
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 24.6 ft/s² | Best | |
| 24.0 ft/s² | -0.6 ft/s² | |
| 22.6 ft/s² | -2.0 ft/s² | |
| 22.0 ft/s² | -2.6 ft/s² | |
| 22.0 ft/s² | -2.6 ft/s² | |
| 21.3 ft/s² | -3.3 ft/s² | |
| 21.0 ft/s² | -3.6 ft/s² | |
| 20.7 ft/s² | -3.9 ft/s² | |
| 19.7 ft/s² | -4.9 ft/s² | |
| 17.1 ft/s² | -7.5 ft/s² |
The difference between best and worst was 30.7% (7.5 ft/s²).
Snow
3Snow Braking
Snow braking in feet (25 - 3 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 102 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 103 ft | +1 ft | 9 mph | |
| 104 ft | +2 ft | 12 mph | |
| 106 ft | +4 ft | 15 mph | |
| 106 ft | +4 ft | 16 mph | |
| 107 ft | +5 ft | 18 mph | |
| 109 ft | +7 ft | 20 mph | |
| 113 ft | +11 ft | 25 mph | |
| 115 ft | +13 ft | 26 mph | |
| 120 ft | +18 ft | 31 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 18% (18 ft ≈ 1.2 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Bridgestone Weather Control A005 EVO would still be travelling at 31 mph when the Michelin CrossClimate 2 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
Snow Traction
Snow acceleration time (3 - 25 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 5.5 s | Best | |
| 5.7 s | +0.20 s | |
| 5.9 s | +0.40 s | |
| 6 s | +0.50 s | |
| 6.2 s | +0.70 s | |
| 6.7 s | +1.20 s | |
| 6.8 s | +1.30 s | |
| 7.1 s | +1.60 s | |
| 7.8 s | +2.30 s | |
| 9.5 s | +4.00 s |
The difference between best and worst was 72.7% (4 s).
Snow Handling
Snow handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 110 s | Best | |
| 113.3 s | +3.30 s | |
| 114.3 s | +4.30 s | |
| 114.7 s | +4.70 s | |
| 115.5 s | +5.50 s | |
| 115.8 s | +5.80 s | |
| 116.7 s | +6.70 s | |
| 118.9 s | +8.90 s | |
| 120 s | +10.00 s | |
| 125.4 s | +15.40 s |
The difference between best and worst was 14% (15.4 s).
Comfort
1Noise
Internal noise in dB
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 69.1 dB | Best | |
| 69.3 dB | +0.20 dB | |
| 69.4 dB | +0.30 dB | |
| 69.4 dB | +0.30 dB | |
| 69.4 dB | +0.30 dB | |
| 69.5 dB | +0.40 dB | |
| 69.5 dB | +0.40 dB | |
| 69.6 dB | +0.50 dB | |
| 69.7 dB | +0.60 dB | |
| 69.8 dB | +0.70 dB |
All the tires in the Noise test finished less than 3% apart.
Value
1Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance in kg t
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Extra fuel / year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7.5 kg/t | Best | $0 | |
| 7.5 kg/t | Best | $0 | |
| 7.9 kg/t | +0.40 kg/t | $16 | |
| 8.1 kg/t | +0.60 kg/t | $24 | |
| 8.2 kg/t | +0.70 kg/t | $27 | |
| 8.2 kg/t | +0.70 kg/t | $27 | |
| 8.5 kg/t | +1.00 kg/t | $39 | |
| 8.5 kg/t | +1.00 kg/t | $39 | |
| 9.1 kg/t | +1.60 kg/t | $63 | |
| 9.4 kg/t | +1.90 kg/t | $74 |
The difference between best and worst was 25.3% (1.9 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Vredestein Quatrac Pro uses about 21 gal ($74) more fuel than the Bridgestone Weather Control A005 EVO.
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 → 3.1 mph
- Wet Braking
- 49.7 → 3.1 mph
- Snow Braking
- 24.9 → 3.1 mph
- Snow Traction
- 3.1 → 24.9 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 · 25% | ||
| Dry Braking | 55% | 13.75% |
| Dry Handling | 40% | 10% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 5% | 1.25% |
| Wet · 35% | ||
| Wet Braking | 50% | 17.5% |
| Wet Handling | 25% | 8.75% |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 5% | 1.75% |
| Straight Aqua | 10% | 3.5% |
| Curved Aquaplaning | 10% | 3.5% |
| Snow · 25% | ||
| Snow Braking | 45% | 11.25% |
| Snow Traction | 5% | 1.25% |
| Snow Handling | 40% | 10% |
| Subj. Snow Handling | 10% | 2.5% |
| Comfort · 5% | ||
| Noise | 100% | 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.
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.
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.
Curved Aquaplaning
For curved aquaplaning, I use a circular track, typically around 100 meters in diameter, with a flooded arc of controlled water depth, usually about 7 mm. The vehicle is instrumented with GPS telemetry and a tri-axial accelerometer. I drive through the flooded section at progressively increasing speed, typically in 5 km/h increments, and record the minimum sustained lateral acceleration at each step. The test continues until lateral acceleration collapses, indicating complete aquaplaning. The result is expressed as remaining lateral acceleration in m/s² as speed rises.
Snow Braking
For snow braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 50 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a groomed, compacted snow surface, measuring 45-5 km/h. I generally use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tire ever brakes on the same piece of snow twice. My standard programme is twelve runs per tire set, although the sequence can extend further if the data justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. To correct for changing snow surface conditions, I run reference tires repeatedly — typically every two candidate test sets.
Snow Traction
For snow traction, I accelerate the vehicle from rest on a groomed snow surface with traction control active and measure speed and time using GPS telemetry. I typically use a 5–35 km/h measurement window to reduce the influence of launch transients and powertrain irregularities. I use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tire ever accelerates on the same piece of snow twice. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. I complete multiple runs per tire set and average the valid results. Reference tires are run typically every two candidate test sets to correct for changing snow surface conditions.
Snow Handling
For snow handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated snow handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible. The circuit is groomed and prepared after every run while tires are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, excluding laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Because snow surfaces degrade more rapidly than asphalt, control runs are carried out more frequently — typically every two candidate test sets.
Noise
For cabin noise assessment, I drive at controlled speeds, typically 50, 80, 100, and 120 km/h, on NVH test surfaces with defined texture characteristics. Calibrated microphones are positioned at ear height within the cabin. Measurements are taken using A-weighting, with one-third octave analysis where required to identify tonal features such as cavity resonance. Windows remain closed, ventilation is off, and ambient conditions are controlled so the data reflects the tire rather than external interference.
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.
2021 All Season Tire Market Overview
225/50 R1732 tires tested
10 of these 10 tires tested again
2024 Minivan / SUV All Season Tire Test
235/55 R1712 tires tested
8 of these 10 tires tested again
2021 Auto Bild All Season Tire Test
225/50 R1716 tires tested
8 of these 10 tires tested again
