2025 Motor Low Rolling Resistance (AA) Tire Test

Below are all the data points for the 2025 Motor Low Rolling Resistance (AA) Tire Test, displaying how each tire performed across all test categories. The spider chart below provides a complete overview of performance, where one hundred percent represents the best performance in each category. The larger the area covered by each tire's plot, the better its overall performance.
How to read these charts: For each test category, data is presented relative to the best performing tire. The direction indicates whether lower or higher values are better - pay close attention to this when interpreting results.

Performance Overview

This radar chart shows relative performance across all test categories, with 100% representing the best performance in each category. Reference tires may have gaps where data is not available.

Continental UltraContact NXT
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
Michelin e.Primacy
Bridgestone Turanza T005
Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
Nexen N Blue S
Prinx XLAB Comfort EV

Quick Navigation

Dry Performance Overview

Dry Braking (M)

Dry braking in meters (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Michelin e.Primacy with a result of 36.1 M. The difference between best and worst was 8.6%.

Dry Handling (s)

Dry handling time in seconds (Lower is better)

Key Insight: All the tires in the dry handling test finished less than 3% apart.

Subj. Dry Handling ( Points)

Subjective Dry Handling Score (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Continental UltraContact NXT with a result of 7.1 Points. The difference between best and worst was 19.7%.

Wet Performance Overview

Wet Braking (M)

Wet braking in meters (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Continental UltraContact NXT with a result of 50.2 M. The difference between best and worst was 26.9%.

Wet Handling (s)

Wet handling time in seconds (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Continental UltraContact NXT with a result of 84.6 s. The difference between best and worst was 10%.

Wet Circle (m/s)

Lateral wet grip in m/s squared (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Continental UltraContact NXT with a result of 0.841 m/s. The difference between best and worst was 10.2%.

Straight Aqua (Km/H)

Float Speed in Km/H (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Nexen N Blue S with a result of 76.7 Km/H. The difference between best and worst was 7.3%.

Curved Aquaplaning (m/sec2)

Remaining lateral acceleration (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Bridgestone Turanza T005 with a result of 2.98 m/sec2. The difference between best and worst was 23.5%.

Comfort Performance Overview

Subj. Comfort ( Points)

Subjective Comfort Score (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 with a result of 7 Points. The difference between best and worst was 14.3%.

Noise (dB)

External noise in dB (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 with a result of 63.4 dB. The difference between best and worst was 5.1%.

Value Performance Overview

Rolling Resistance (kg / t)

Rolling resistance in kg t (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Michelin e.Primacy with a result of 5.48 kg / t. The difference between best and worst was 19.5%.

Overall Findings

Based on the weighted scoring from all tests, here are the overall results:

Position Tire Score
1 Continental UltraContact NXT 0%
2 Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 0%
3 Michelin e.Primacy 0%
4 Bridgestone Turanza T005 0%
5 Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun 0%
6 Nexen N Blue S 0%
7 Prinx XLAB Comfort EV 0%
comments powered by Disqus