Menu

Test Charts / Auto Bild Allrad

2024 Summer SUV 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
235/55 R19
Tires tested
11
Disciplines
14

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
110 ft 0 ft 4 mph
112 ft +2 ft 12 mph
113 ft +3 ft 13 mph
113 ft +3 ft 14 mph
115 ft +5 ft 17 mph
116 ft +6 ft 19 mph
116 ft +6 ft 19 mph
117 ft +7 ft 20 mph
119 ft +9 ft 22 mph
119 ft +9 ft 23 mph

The difference between best and worst was 8.7% (9 ft ≈ 0.6 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Ceat Sport Drive SUV would still be travelling at 23 mph when the Bridgestone Potenza Sport 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 (100 - 0 )

Higher is better ↑
Dry Handling
Position / TireResultGap to best
67.5 mph Best
67.1 mph -0.4 mph
66.8 mph -0.7 mph
66.7 mph -0.8 mph
66.7 mph -0.8 mph
66.2 mph -1.3 mph
66.2 mph -1.3 mph
66.1 mph -1.4 mph
66.1 mph -1.4 mph
66.1 mph -1.4 mph
66.1 mph -1.4 mph

All the tires in the Dry Handling test finished less than 3% apart.

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
164 ft +2 ft 9 mph
165 ft +3 ft 12 mph
166 ft +4 ft 13 mph
167 ft +5 ft 14 mph
170 ft +8 ft 17 mph
176 ft +14 ft 23 mph
177 ft +15 ft 23 mph
178 ft +16 ft 24 mph
185 ft +23 ft 29 mph
195 ft +33 ft 33 mph

The difference between best and worst was 20.3% (33 ft ≈ 2.2 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Maxxis Victra Sport VS5 SUV would still be travelling at 33 mph when the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 SUV 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
52.0 mph Best
51.4 mph -0.6 mph
51.1 mph -0.9 mph
51.0 mph -1.0 mph
50.4 mph -1.6 mph
50.1 mph -1.9 mph
50.1 mph -1.9 mph
50.1 mph -1.9 mph
49.5 mph -2.5 mph
48.7 mph -3.3 mph
48.5 mph -3.5 mph

The difference between best and worst was 6.7% (3.5 mph).

Wet Circle

Wet Circle Lap Time in seconds

Lower is better ↓
Wet Circle
Position / TireResultGap to best
20.36 s Best
20.58 s +0.22 s
20.81 s +0.45 s
20.91 s +0.55 s
20.92 s +0.56 s
20.99 s +0.63 s
21.23 s +0.87 s
21.37 s +1.01 s
21.38 s +1.02 s
21.59 s +1.23 s
21.75 s +1.39 s

The difference between best and worst was 6.8% (1.39 s).

Straight Aqua

Float Speed in mph

Higher is better ↑
Straight Aqua
Position / TireResultGap to best
58.0 mph Best
55.8 mph -2.2 mph
55.3 mph -2.7 mph
55.2 mph -2.8 mph
55.1 mph -2.9 mph
54.2 mph -3.8 mph
54.0 mph -4.0 mph
54.0 mph -4.0 mph
53.9 mph -4.1 mph
53.7 mph -4.3 mph
52.3 mph -5.7 mph

The difference between best and worst was 9.8% (5.7 mph).

Curved Aquaplaning

Remaining lateral acceleration

Higher is better ↑
Curved Aquaplaning
Position / TireResultGap to best
9.0 ft/s² Best
8.9 ft/s² -0.1 ft/s²
8.9 ft/s² -0.1 ft/s²
8.8 ft/s² -0.2 ft/s²
8.7 ft/s² -0.3 ft/s²
8.7 ft/s² -0.3 ft/s²
8.4 ft/s² -0.6 ft/s²
8.3 ft/s² -0.7 ft/s²
8.2 ft/s² -0.8 ft/s²
7.8 ft/s² -1.2 ft/s²
7.5 ft/s² -1.5 ft/s²

The difference between best and worst was 16.1% (1.5 ft/s²).

Off road

5

Gravel Handling

Gravel Handling Average Speed

Higher is better ↑
Gravel Handling
Position / TireResultGap to best
55.1 mph Best
54.3 mph -0.8 mph
54.2 mph -0.9 mph
54.2 mph -0.9 mph
54.1 mph -1.0 mph
54.1 mph -1.0 mph
53.8 mph -1.3 mph
53.7 mph -1.4 mph
53.5 mph -1.6 mph
53.3 mph -1.8 mph
53.2 mph -1.9 mph

The difference between best and worst was 3.5% (1.9 mph).

Gravel Traction

Pulling Force in pounds-force

Higher is better ↑
Gravel Traction
Position / TireResultGap to best
1,840 lbf Best
1,809 lbf -31 lbf
1,778 lbf -62 lbf
1,758 lbf -82 lbf
1,744 lbf -96 lbf
1,739 lbf -101 lbf
1,728 lbf -112 lbf
1,700 lbf -140 lbf
1,692 lbf -148 lbf
1,659 lbf -181 lbf
1,608 lbf -232 lbf

The difference between best and worst was 12.6% (232 lbf).

Sand Traction

Pulling Force in pounds-force

Higher is better ↑
Sand Traction
Position / TireResultGap to best
2,479 lbf Best
2,366 lbf -113 lbf
2,346 lbf -133 lbf
2,155 lbf -324 lbf
2,135 lbf -344 lbf
2,089 lbf -390 lbf
2,069 lbf -410 lbf
2,035 lbf -444 lbf
1,956 lbf -523 lbf
1,947 lbf -532 lbf
1,935 lbf -544 lbf

The difference between best and worst was 21.9% (544 lbf).

Grass Traction

Pulling Force in pounds-force

Higher is better ↑
Grass Traction
Position / TireResultGap to best
548 lbf Best
498 lbf -50 lbf
494 lbf -54 lbf
453 lbf -95 lbf
442 lbf -106 lbf
433 lbf -115 lbf
431 lbf -117 lbf
412 lbf -136 lbf
394 lbf -154 lbf
385 lbf -163 lbf
334 lbf -214 lbf

The difference between best and worst was 39.1% (214 lbf).

Mud Traction

Pulling Force in pounds-force

Higher is better ↑
Mud Traction
Position / TireResultGap to best
557 lbf Best
548 lbf -9 lbf
543 lbf -14 lbf
528 lbf -29 lbf
525 lbf -32 lbf
506 lbf -51 lbf
504 lbf -53 lbf
503 lbf -54 lbf
493 lbf -64 lbf
492 lbf -65 lbf
472 lbf -85 lbf

The difference between best and worst was 15.3% (85 lbf).

Comfort

1

Noise

External noise in dB

Lower is better ↓
Noise
Position / TireResultGap to best
68.6 dB Best
69.2 dB +0.60 dB
69.9 dB +1.30 dB
70 dB +1.40 dB
70 dB +1.40 dB
70.3 dB +1.70 dB
70.4 dB +1.80 dB
70.8 dB +2.20 dB
71 dB +2.40 dB
71.9 dB +3.30 dB
72.8 dB +4.20 dB

The difference between best and worst was 6.1% (4.2 dB).

Value

1

Rolling Resistance

Rolling resistance in kg t

Lower is better ↓
Rolling Resistance
Position / TireResultGap to bestExtra fuel / year
7.2 kg/t Best $0
7.63 kg/t +0.43 kg/t $18
7.73 kg/t +0.53 kg/t $22
7.73 kg/t +0.53 kg/t $22
7.83 kg/t +0.63 kg/t $26
8.15 kg/t +0.95 kg/t $39
8.25 kg/t +1.05 kg/t $43
8.44 kg/t +1.24 kg/t $51
8.55 kg/t +1.35 kg/t $55
8.85 kg/t +1.65 kg/t $67
9.23 kg/t +2.03 kg/t $83

The difference between best and worst was 28.2% (2.03 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport uses about 23 gal ($83) more fuel than the Pirelli Scorpion.

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.