8 min read
Error: Article not found
Similar Tire Tests
Show All summer tire tests2025 AutoView Sports Tire Test
May 2026
275/35R19
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
5 tires
2026 autozurnal Eco Summer Tire Test
April 2026
215/55 R18
Hankook iON Evo
10 tires
2026 Motor Summer Tire Test
April 2026
225/45 R17
Continental PremiumContact 7
9 tires
2026 AutoBild Track Day Tire Test
April 2026
275/35 R19
Pirelli P Zero Trofeo RS
7 tires
2026 Summer ECO Tire Test
March 2026
195/55 R16
Dunlop Blue Response TG
8 tires
2026 Sport Auto Summer Tire Test
March 2026
205/45 R17
Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo
7 tires
Hey Jon,
For someone who drives mostly on empty b-roads and lives for cornering but does not care for speed as such but being close to the limit (with margin for unexpected etc.). Would C3 225/45/17 XL be a good pairing to Civic 1.6diesel 10th gen (OEM is 215/50/17)? I am also considering PS5 215/50/17 and F1 Asy6 225/45/17 from UHP segment but I am afraid that extra grip will make the chassis hit the limit first, which makes for boring ride. Also I am looking for great communication and liveliness from tire which I do not think PS5 gives, nor Asy6 even if better at it (I owned gen 2 of Goodyear F1).
Best tire I used was Pzero Nero back in the day on my MX-5. With very stiff wall, limited and snappy grip but with progressive sand paper like feeling to slide recovery :). Real joy to drive. Driver's tire. I believe that is what Pirelli still do, driver's tires? Can C3 be considered as such? And the main question is it better in this particular function than PS5 / Asy6?
Sadly I cannot get PZ5 in the size I need as it probably would be my tire of choice.
Thank you
I am finding it hard to locate the C3 in Golf format, ie 205/55 R16 91V....reinforced or 94 are there.
Is it made in this format? Thank you.
If you can find it in 94v you're fine to fit it, often the 91 and 94 versions of the tires are the same as it's cheaper to product one instead of two lines for very similar products.
Dear Tire Reviews Team,
I’d like to propose that you consider adding RIM PROTECTION as a highlighted feature in your tire reviews. While it doesn’t necessarily need to be tested exhaustively, it’s a feature that I, along with many other customers, truly value. Not all tire manufacturers provide rim protection, but it makes a significant difference to those of us who care about preserving our rims from damage caused by curbs.
Personally, I would not consider purchasing a tire that doesn’t offer rim protection, and I believe many others share this sentiment. Including it in your reviews could help guide us in making more informed decisions.
Thank you for considering this suggestion, and I look forward to seeing this feature in future reviews!
Best regards,
Mauro van Leijden
Hey Jon, What would be the more comfortable tire on a Honda Civic 1.8 140ps . The cinturato C3 with a load index 94 or the Pilot sport 5 with a load index of 91? The reccommended load index is 91
is that because you can't get the C3 in 91??
Yes exactly. I actually got the c3 in 94. It is soft and forgiving on potholes, but not as sporty as I would like it.
It should be C3 due to much softer construction in general. Good indication how soft the carcass of the tire will be is rolling resistance - the lower the softer.
That is why tires like outgoing Potenza Sport are dying breed. ECO bureaucracy is changing the landscape, and of course not for better for car enthusiasts.
Agreed
Read this review a few times and you're right, I've just had 4 new Ultrac+ (225/60/18) put on my Outback, impressively quiet, very comfortable and a decent wedge less than 'premium" options. If they handle as well in the wet as the test suggests, I'll be even happier.
Yay
Hey Jon we got pirelli pz5, hankook s1evo4 and kumho ps72 out, any updates for this years UHP test? Also would be amazing to finally see Falken fk520 in a UHP test from you.
My test should be out next week with the PZ5 and FK520 in.
Super! Would these tests translate to a 16 inch fwd car?! Interesting to see C3 coming through well. As yet it isn't made in a 91V rating for a 16 inch wheel, so considering getting it in 94 load setting, or the PremContact 7 in 91. Also be good to compare the Primacy 5.
Generally there is good crossover between drivetrains.
Interesting that, despite being poorest in curved aquaplaning, the ZE 320 had 'no issue with the deeper water on the track'. Care to comment on the bit of tension here?
Perhaps the aquaplaning test water depth is deeper again (why not list it?).
The best answer I can give is sometimes tires testing does not make sense. Generally wet handling is 1mm and straight / curved aqua between 7 and 10mm.
The deeper water parts on the track were puddles in places so deeper again, which might indicate the falken had a narrower profile. I didn't measure it this time.
I suspect that the best explanatory hypothesis is that even the puddley bits of the wet track were not 7-10 mm.
If they were, then my next hypothesis would be that, as it's a puddle & not an extended bit of deep water (as in an aquaplaning test), the tire would be in & out of it very quickly & the capacity of the tread voids to briefly store water rather than move it out might be explanatorily significant.
There's always sense to be made even if one can't make it!
Nice test! Always looking forward to your tests.
Too bad you didn’t get a hold of the new Ultrac+.
I’m currently deciding between ultrac+ and ze320 so nice to see the falken is a good tire and it seems comfortable.