2026 Autobild Summer Tire Test

Auto Bild's 2026 summer tire test covers the 245/45 R19 size - a common fitment on upper-mid-size cars including the BMW 5 Series, Audi A6 and Mercedes S-Class - and has put 50 tires through an initial qualifying round (linked in the tire test section) before selecting the 20 shortest-stopping for the full test!

The results broadly confirm that the established premium brands remain the safest choice, with Hankook, Goodyear, Michelin and Pirelli all earning the top "exemplary" rating. The standout result, however, is Giti - a brand not typically associated with the premium tier - which scores highly enough across wet and dry tests to join that group, something the testers note in the article. This is a huge step forward for Giti, it's exciting to see how they perform in other tests and other categories across the coming months.

At the other end of the price scale, the Linglong Sport Master produces the single most impressive individual result of the entire test, recording the shortest wet braking distance of all fifty original candidates and the only sub-40-metre stop from 100 km/h in the wet. Despite that, it finishes sixteenth overall, held back by the lowest projected mileage in the finalist group - meaning buyers drawn in by its low purchase price and strong safety performance will find themselves replacing it sooner than almost any other tire here, meaning it worked out to be more expensive than many of top tyers in this test.

Dry

Hankook sets the benchmark in dry braking with the shortest stopping distance in the test, with Linglong and Nexen close behind - an impressive result given both are significantly cheaper than most rivals. The Falken and Sava are at the back of the field, though the gap between first and last is just 2.5 metres.

Hankook leads dry handling ahead of Michelin and Vredestein, with the top half of the field separated by a relatively narrow margin. Falken and Sava fall furthest behind, consistent with their weaker dry braking results - the two dry tests broadly agree on the order.

The subjective dry handling scores largely reflect the objective lap times, with Hankook and Michelin rated highest. Falken, Kleber and Sava receive the lowest ratings, with the test team noting imprecise or vague behaviour at the limit.

Wet

Linglong produces the standout result in wet braking - the only tire in the test to stop under 40 metres from 100 km/h - despite being the cheapest finalist. Yokohama and Sava are at the back, with the full spread between best and worst reaching nearly 9 metres, a significant gap in a real-world emergency stop.

Hankook leads wet handling ahead of Pirelli, which the test team identified as the strongest wet specialist in terms of lateral grip and handling response. Kleber and Maxxis are at the back, consistent with their longer wet braking distances - both show a pattern of reduced wet-weather ability across multiple tests.

Subjective wet handling scores reflect the objective results closely, with Hankook and Pirelli rated highest. Maxxis and Sava receive the lowest ratings, with the test team specifically noting vague and imprecise wet behaviour for both - a concern given wet tests account for 40% of the overall result.

Toyo and Goodyear lead straight aquaplaning resistance, both able to sustain higher speeds before losing contact than any other tire in the test. Maxxis and Nokian are at the back of the field, though notably Toyo's strong aquaplaning result does not carry over into wet handling, where it finishes in the lower half.

Comfort

Hankook, Goodyear, Bridgestone and Dunlop receive the highest rolling comfort ratings from the test team. Giti, GT Radial and Maxxis are rated lowest - none of these three score particularly poorly in performance tests, so the comfort result is worth noting for buyers who prioritise ride quality on poorer road surfaces.

Goodyear and Nexen are the quietest tires in the test, with Pirelli at the opposite end - the loudest of all finalists by a clear margin. The noise ranking does not follow the performance ranking closely, and several of the higher-performing tires sit in the noisier half of the field.

Value

Goodyear, Michelin and Continental have the best wear, but all three carry higher purchase prices. Linglong and Toyo project the shortest mileage, which is significant.

Hankook offers the best cost-per-km ratio in the test, combining competitive mileage with a mid-range purchase price. Continental is the most expensive per kilometre despite its high projected mileage, reflecting its high upfront cost. The results show that purchase price alone is a poor guide to running cost.

Kleber has the lowest rolling resistance of all twenty finalists - a meaningful result for fuel or energy costs over the life of the tire. Yokohama is the worst in this test by a notable margin, and its rolling resistance result is flagged by the test team as a primary concern, directly increasing running costs regardless of performance in other areas.

Kleber again leads in tread abrasion after 4,000 km, losing the least material of any tire in the test - consistent with its low rolling resistance and strong mileage projection. Linglong loses the most material, reinforcing the pattern seen in projected mileage. Continental and Falken also show low abrasion, supporting their higher mileage estimates.

Results

Hankook takes the overall win on the back of leading performances in both dry tests, with Goodyear and Michelin close behind - the top three are all established premium brands, though Giti and Pirelli join them in the "exemplary" rating category

1^st

Hankook Ventus Evo

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/70
• Origin: Hungary
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 11.69 kgs
• Price: 620.00

The Hankook Ventus evo takes first place overall, with the strongest dry handling score and the shortest dry braking distance in the test. Wet performance is also strong, with the fastest wet handling lap time and competitive braking. The tire offers a good cost-per-km ratio relative to its performance level. Rolling comfort is above average. The main limitation is that wet grip, while good, falls slightly short of its dry performance level.

Dry

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	1st	32.8 M			100%
Dry Handling	1st	101.5 Km/H			100%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	10 Points			100%

Wet

95.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	2nd	42.1 M	39.3 M	+2.8 M	93.35%
Wet Handling	1st	83.6 Km/H			100%
Subj. Wet Handling	1st	8.7 Points			100%
Wet Circle	1st	14.51 s			100%
Straight Aqua	15th	90.4 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-4.5 Km/H	95.26%
Curved Aquaplaning	12th	3.4 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.57 m/sec2	85.64%

Comfort

99.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	1st	8 Points			100%
Noise	7th	71.8 dB	70.6 dB	+1.2 dB	98.33%

Value

87.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	4th	56310 KM	63830 KM	-7520 KM	88.22%
Value	1st	11.01 Price/1000			100%
Rolling Resistance	5th	7.69 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+1.02 kg / t	86.74%
Abrasion	8th	1470 g	1122 g	+348 g	76.33%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

2^nd

Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/70
• Origin: Germany
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 11.22 kgs
• Price: 780.00

The Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 finishes second overall and wins the "Green Tire" award, primarily on the strength of its projected mileage - by far the highest in the test at 63,830 km. Performance across wet and dry tests is consistently high without leading in any single area. Rolling comfort is good, and pass-by noise is among the lowest recorded. The main drawback is a relatively high purchase price.

Dry

91.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	12th	34.5 M	32.8 M	+1.7 M	95.07%
Dry Handling	7th	100.5 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-1 Km/H	99.01%
Subj. Dry Handling	7th	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%

Wet

96.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	7th	42.9 M	39.3 M	+3.6 M	91.61%
Wet Handling	11th	82.2 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1.4 Km/H	98.33%
Subj. Wet Handling	4th	8 Points	8.7 Points	-0.7 Points	91.95%
Wet Circle	4th	14.68 s	14.51 s	+0.17 s	98.84%
Straight Aqua	2nd	94.7 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-0.2 Km/H	99.79%
Curved Aquaplaning	1st	3.97 m/sec2			100%

Comfort

99.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	1st	8 Points			100%
Noise	2nd	70.8 dB	70.6 dB	+0.2 dB	99.72%

Value

86.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	1st	63830 KM			100%
Value	6th	12.22 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+1.21 Price/1000	90.1%
Rolling Resistance	13th	8.33 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+1.66 kg / t	80.07%
Abrasion	7th	1455 g	1122 g	+333 g	77.11%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

3^rd

Michelin Pilot Sport 5

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/72
• Origin: Germany
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 11.25 kgs
• Price: 920.00

The Michelin Pilot Sport 5 takes third place with a strong dry handling score, equal to the Hankook. Wet performance is solid across braking and handling. Mileage is the second highest in the test, which helps offset the high purchase price over the tire's life. Pass-by noise is slightly elevated compared to the top finishers, and the purchase price is among the higher end of the field.

Dry

98.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	9th	34.4 M	32.8 M	+1.6 M	95.35%
Dry Handling	2nd	101.3 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-0.2 Km/H	99.8%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	10 Points			100%

Wet

95.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	9th	43.3 M	39.3 M	+4 M	90.76%
Wet Handling	3rd	82.7 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-0.9 Km/H	98.92%
Subj. Wet Handling	4th	8 Points	8.7 Points	-0.7 Points	91.95%
Wet Circle	9th	14.74 s	14.51 s	+0.23 s	98.44%
Straight Aqua	10th	92 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-2.9 Km/H	96.94%
Curved Aquaplaning	3rd	3.72 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.25 m/sec2	93.7%

Comfort

93.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	19th	74.3 dB	70.6 dB	+3.7 dB	95.02%

Value

82.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	2nd	59670 KM	63830 KM	-4160 KM	93.48%
Value	15th	15.42 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+4.41 Price/1000	71.4%
Rolling Resistance	9th	7.97 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+1.3 kg / t	83.69%
Abrasion	5th	1353 g	1122 g	+231 g	82.93%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

4^th

Giti GitiSport S2 plus

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/70
• Origin: China
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 12.15 kgs
• Price: 610.00

The Giti GitiSport S2+ finishes fourth and is one of the more surprising results in the test. It delivers competent wet and dry performance across all tests without a clear weak area, and its purchase price is among the lower half of the finalists. Rolling resistance is slightly higher than average, which will have a small impact on fuel consumption. The result represents strong value relative to its performance level.

Dry

91.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	6th	34.3 M	32.8 M	+1.5 M	95.63%
Dry Handling	8th	100.3 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-1.2 Km/H	98.82%
Subj. Dry Handling	7th	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%

Wet

95.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	5th	42.5 M	39.3 M	+3.2 M	92.47%
Wet Handling	4th	82.6 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1 Km/H	98.8%
Subj. Wet Handling	4th	8 Points	8.7 Points	-0.7 Points	91.95%
Wet Circle	6th	14.7 s	14.51 s	+0.19 s	98.71%
Straight Aqua	3rd	94.5 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-0.4 Km/H	99.58%
Curved Aquaplaning	4th	3.6 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.37 m/sec2	90.68%

Comfort

91%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	18th	6.7 Points	8 Points	-1.3 Points	83.75%
Noise	7th	71.8 dB	70.6 dB	+1.2 dB	98.33%

Value

77.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	10th	50020 KM	63830 KM	-13810 KM	78.36%
Value	5th	12.2 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+1.19 Price/1000	90.25%
Rolling Resistance	18th	8.99 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+2.32 kg / t	74.19%
Abrasion	14th	1713 g	1122 g	+591 g	65.5%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

4^th

Pirelli Cinturato C3

102Y

• EU Label: B/A/71
• Origin: Romania
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 10.95 kgs
• Price: 790.00

The Pirelli Cinturato C3 shares fourth place with an emphasis on wet performance - wet handling and lateral grip scores are among the best in the test. Dry braking is also competitive. Rolling comfort is acceptable. The notable weakness is pass-by noise, which is the highest recorded in the test. Rolling resistance is low, which benefits running costs.

Dry

89.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	6th	34.3 M	32.8 M	+1.5 M	95.63%
Dry Handling	10th	100 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-1.5 Km/H	98.52%
Subj. Dry Handling	12th	7.3 Points	10 Points	-2.7 Points	73%

Wet

95.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	8th	43 M	39.3 M	+3.7 M	91.4%
Wet Handling	2nd	83.4 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-0.2 Km/H	99.76%
Subj. Wet Handling	1st	8.7 Points			100%
Wet Circle	3rd	14.64 s	14.51 s	+0.13 s	99.11%
Straight Aqua	6th	92.9 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-2 Km/H	97.89%
Curved Aquaplaning	9th	3.46 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.51 m/sec2	87.15%

Comfort

92.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	20th	75.2 dB	70.6 dB	+4.6 dB	93.88%

Value

80.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	7th	50350 KM	63830 KM	-13480 KM	78.88%
Value	16th	15.69 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+4.68 Price/1000	70.17%
Rolling Resistance	6th	7.7 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+1.03 kg / t	86.62%
Abrasion	4th	1320 g	1122 g	+198 g	85%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

6^th

Continental PremiumContact 7

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/72
• Origin: Czech Republic
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 11.14 kgs
• Price: 980.00

The Continental PremiumContact 7 finishes sixth with a balanced all-round profile across wet and dry tests. Wet handling and braking are both strong, and dry braking is competitive. Tread wear after 4,000 km is one of the lowest in the test, which contributes to longevity. The main downside is the highest purchase price of any tire in the test.

Dry

86.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	6th	34.3 M	32.8 M	+1.5 M	95.63%
Dry Handling	15th	99.5 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-2 Km/H	98.03%
Subj. Dry Handling	13th	6.7 Points	10 Points	-3.3 Points	67%

Wet

94.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	6th	42.7 M	39.3 M	+3.4 M	92.04%
Wet Handling	9th	82.3 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1.3 Km/H	98.44%
Subj. Wet Handling	4th	8 Points	8.7 Points	-0.7 Points	91.95%
Wet Circle	7th	14.72 s	14.51 s	+0.21 s	98.57%
Straight Aqua	12th	91.5 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-3.4 Km/H	96.42%
Curved Aquaplaning	9th	3.46 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.51 m/sec2	87.15%

Comfort

94.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	15th	72.7 dB	70.6 dB	+2.1 dB	97.11%

Value

80.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	3rd	56350 KM	63830 KM	-7480 KM	88.28%
Value	20th	17.39 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+6.38 Price/1000	63.31%
Rolling Resistance	8th	7.83 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+1.16 kg / t	85.19%
Abrasion	2nd	1302 g	1122 g	+180 g	86.18%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

6^th

Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/72
• Origin: South Korea
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 12.13 kgs
• Price: 600.00

The Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 also finishes sixth and performs particularly well in wet conditions, with good braking and handling results. Dry performance is competitive across the board. The purchase price is among the lowest in the finalist group, making it a strong value option. Rolling noise is slightly above average, which is the main comfort-related limitation.

Dry

91.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	9th	34.4 M	32.8 M	+1.6 M	95.35%
Dry Handling	10th	100 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-1.5 Km/H	98.52%
Subj. Dry Handling	7th	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%

Wet

95.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	4th	42.4 M	39.3 M	+3.1 M	92.69%
Wet Handling	4th	82.6 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1 Km/H	98.8%
Subj. Wet Handling	1st	8.7 Points			100%
Wet Circle	2nd	14.6 s	14.51 s	+0.09 s	99.38%
Straight Aqua	14th	91 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-3.9 Km/H	95.89%
Curved Aquaplaning	11th	3.43 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.54 m/sec2	86.4%

Comfort

93.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	18th	74.1 dB	70.6 dB	+3.5 dB	95.28%

Value

79%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	13th	48230 KM	63830 KM	-15600 KM	75.56%
Value	7th	12.44 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+1.43 Price/1000	88.5%
Rolling Resistance	12th	8.15 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+1.48 kg / t	81.84%
Abrasion	11th	1605 g	1122 g	+483 g	69.91%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

8^th

GT Radial SportActive 2 EVO

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/69
• Origin: China
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 12.04 kgs
• Price: 550.00

The GT Radial SportActive 2 Evo finishes eighth with competitive wet and dry results and the second-lowest cost-per-km figure in the test. Wet safety margins are adequate, and dry performance is consistent. Rolling resistance is slightly higher than average, and rolling comfort is rated below the mid-field. For buyers prioritising running costs, it offers a strong case.

Dry

90.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	16th	35 M	32.8 M	+2.2 M	93.71%
Dry Handling	12th	99.9 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-1.6 Km/H	98.42%
Subj. Dry Handling	7th	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%

Wet

94.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	11th	43.6 M	39.3 M	+4.3 M	90.14%
Wet Handling	6th	82.5 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1.1 Km/H	98.68%
Subj. Wet Handling	11th	7.3 Points	8.7 Points	-1.4 Points	83.91%
Wet Circle	11th	14.82 s	14.51 s	+0.31 s	97.91%
Straight Aqua	8th	92.8 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-2.1 Km/H	97.79%
Curved Aquaplaning	2nd	3.85 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.12 m/sec2	96.98%

Comfort

91.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	18th	6.7 Points	8 Points	-1.3 Points	83.75%
Noise	4th	71.1 dB	70.6 dB	+0.5 dB	99.3%

Value

78.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	11th	49440 KM	63830 KM	-14390 KM	77.46%
Value	2nd	11.12 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+0.11 Price/1000	99.01%
Rolling Resistance	15th	8.7 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+2.03 kg / t	76.67%
Abrasion	17th	1791 g	1122 g	+669 g	62.65%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

9^th

Nexen N Fera Sport SU2

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/71
• Origin: Czech Republic
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 12.25 kgs
• Price: 580.00

The Nexen N'Fera Sport finishes ninth with short braking distances in both wet and dry conditions and good overall safety margins. It qualifies as a solid mid-range choice. The noted handling weakness is a slightly delayed turn-in response, which affects steering precision. Pass-by noise is low, placing it among the quieter tires in the test.

Dry

87.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	2nd	33.9 M	32.8 M	+1.1 M	96.76%
Dry Handling	16th	99.4 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-2.1 Km/H	97.93%
Subj. Dry Handling	13th	6.7 Points	10 Points	-3.3 Points	67%

Wet

92.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	3rd	42.3 M	39.3 M	+3 M	92.91%
Wet Handling	13th	82 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1.6 Km/H	98.09%
Subj. Wet Handling	11th	7.3 Points	8.7 Points	-1.4 Points	83.91%
Wet Circle	11th	14.82 s	14.51 s	+0.31 s	97.91%
Straight Aqua	6th	92.9 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-2 Km/H	97.89%
Curved Aquaplaning	13th	3.38 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.59 m/sec2	85.14%

Comfort

95.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	1st	70.6 dB			100%

Value

78.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	14th	47810 KM	63830 KM	-16020 KM	74.9%
Value	4th	12.13 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+1.12 Price/1000	90.77%
Rolling Resistance	10th	8.04 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+1.37 kg / t	82.96%
Abrasion	15th	1719 g	1122 g	+597 g	65.27%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

9^th

Vredestein Ultrac Pro

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/72
• Origin: Netherlands
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 11.53 kgs
• Price: 640.00

The Vredestein Ultrac Pro also finishes ninth with its strongest performance in dry handling, where it matches the top scorers. Dry braking is short and rolling resistance is low. Projected mileage is one of the lower figures in the finalist group, which reduces its cost efficiency and is its main weakness relative to its performance level.

Dry

94.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	5th	34.2 M	32.8 M	+1.4 M	95.91%
Dry Handling	3rd	101 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-0.5 Km/H	99.51%
Subj. Dry Handling	3rd	8.7 Points	10 Points	-1.3 Points	87%

Wet

92.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	15th	45 M	39.3 M	+5.7 M	87.33%
Wet Handling	9th	82.3 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1.3 Km/H	98.44%
Subj. Wet Handling	4th	8 Points	8.7 Points	-0.7 Points	91.95%
Wet Circle	5th	14.69 s	14.51 s	+0.18 s	98.77%
Straight Aqua	15th	90.4 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-4.5 Km/H	95.26%
Curved Aquaplaning	17th	3.23 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.74 m/sec2	81.36%

Comfort

95.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	3rd	71 dB	70.6 dB	+0.4 dB	99.44%

Value

73.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	17th	42100 KM	63830 KM	-21730 KM	65.96%
Value	14th	15.2 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+4.19 Price/1000	72.43%
Rolling Resistance	4th	7.65 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+0.98 kg / t	87.19%
Abrasion	12th	1617 g	1122 g	+495 g	69.39%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

11^th

Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/72
• Origin: Italy
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 11.52 kgs
• Price: 850.00

The Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo finishes eleventh with consistently solid dry and wet results without standing out in any individual test. Rolling comfort is rated above average. The tire is competent across conditions but is limited by a high purchase price and slightly above-average rolling resistance, both of which affect overall cost efficiency.

Dry

86.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	12th	34.5 M	32.8 M	+1.7 M	95.07%
Dry Handling	13th	99.8 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-1.7 Km/H	98.33%
Subj. Dry Handling	13th	6.7 Points	10 Points	-3.3 Points	67%

Wet

93.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	13th	44.1 M	39.3 M	+4.8 M	89.12%
Wet Handling	7th	82.4 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1.2 Km/H	98.56%
Subj. Wet Handling	4th	8 Points	8.7 Points	-0.7 Points	91.95%
Wet Circle	8th	14.73 s	14.51 s	+0.22 s	98.51%
Straight Aqua	13th	91.1 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-3.8 Km/H	96%
Curved Aquaplaning	6th	3.54 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.43 m/sec2	89.17%

Comfort

97.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	1st	8 Points			100%
Noise	17th	73.8 dB	70.6 dB	+3.2 dB	95.66%

Value

74.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	6th	51860 KM	63830 KM	-11970 KM	81.25%
Value	18th	16.39 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+5.38 Price/1000	67.18%
Rolling Resistance	16th	8.74 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+2.07 kg / t	76.32%
Abrasion	10th	1533 g	1122 g	+411 g	73.19%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

11^th

Nokian Powerproof 2

102Y

• EU Label: B/A/70
• Origin: Romania
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 12.62 kgs
• Price: 760.00

The Nokian Powerproof 2 also finishes eleventh with strong braking results on both wet and dry surfaces and a competitive rolling resistance figure. Dry handling is good. The overall wet performance package is rated slightly below the front-runners, which holds it back in the standings. Mileage is reasonable and cost-per-km is acceptable.

Dry

91.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	9th	34.4 M	32.8 M	+1.6 M	95.35%
Dry Handling	9th	100.1 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-1.4 Km/H	98.62%
Subj. Dry Handling	7th	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%

Wet

90.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	12th	44 M	39.3 M	+4.7 M	89.32%
Wet Handling	16th	81.7 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1.9 Km/H	97.73%
Subj. Wet Handling	11th	7.3 Points	8.7 Points	-1.4 Points	83.91%
Wet Circle	13th	14.9 s	14.51 s	+0.39 s	97.38%
Straight Aqua	18th	89.7 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-5.2 Km/H	94.52%
Curved Aquaplaning	20th	3.1 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.87 m/sec2	78.09%

Comfort

94.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	6th	71.7 dB	70.6 dB	+1.1 dB	98.47%

Value

80.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	9th	50080 KM	63830 KM	-13750 KM	78.46%
Value	13th	15.18 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+4.17 Price/1000	72.53%
Rolling Resistance	2nd	7.48 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+0.81 kg / t	89.17%
Abrasion	6th	1386 g	1122 g	+264 g	80.95%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

13^th

Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/72
• Origin: Luxembourg
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 11.44 kgs
• Price: 710.00

The Dunlop Sport Maxx RT2 finishes thirteenth. Its strongest area is water dispersal and straight aquaplaning resistance, where it finishes mid-field. Dry braking is competitive and rolling comfort is rated positively. However, it loses ground in the cost tests, with higher tread wear and above-average price-per-km, which drags down the overall result.

Dry

86.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	19th	35.3 M	32.8 M	+2.5 M	92.92%
Dry Handling	14th	99.7 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-1.8 Km/H	98.23%
Subj. Dry Handling	13th	6.7 Points	10 Points	-3.3 Points	67%

Wet

91.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	16th	45.5 M	39.3 M	+6.2 M	86.37%
Wet Handling	11th	82.2 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1.4 Km/H	98.33%
Subj. Wet Handling	11th	7.3 Points	8.7 Points	-1.4 Points	83.91%
Wet Circle	15th	14.97 s	14.51 s	+0.46 s	96.93%
Straight Aqua	4th	93.2 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-1.7 Km/H	98.21%
Curved Aquaplaning	8th	3.48 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.49 m/sec2	87.66%

Comfort

98.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	1st	8 Points			100%
Noise	12th	72.4 dB	70.6 dB	+1.8 dB	97.51%

Value

71%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	16th	44820 KM	63830 KM	-19010 KM	70.22%
Value	17th	15.84 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+4.83 Price/1000	69.51%
Rolling Resistance	16th	8.74 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+2.07 kg / t	76.32%
Abrasion	13th	1656 g	1122 g	+534 g	67.75%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

13^th

Falken Azenis FK520

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/70
• Origin: Turkey
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 11.98 kgs
• Price: 670.00

The Falken Azenis FK520 finishes thirteenth with competent wet braking and good dry safety reserves. Mileage per cost is reasonable. The handling characteristic noted is a vague or imprecise turn-in, which reduces driver confidence in cornering. Rolling resistance is low-to-average. It represents a mid-range option without a standout strength or major weakness.

Dry

81%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	19th	35.3 M	32.8 M	+2.5 M	92.92%
Dry Handling	20th	98.5 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-3 Km/H	97.04%
Subj. Dry Handling	18th	5.3 Points	10 Points	-4.7 Points	53%

Wet

91.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	10th	43.4 M	39.3 M	+4.1 M	90.55%
Wet Handling	17th	81.3 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-2.3 Km/H	97.25%
Subj. Wet Handling	11th	7.3 Points	8.7 Points	-1.4 Points	83.91%
Wet Circle	16th	15 s	14.51 s	+0.49 s	96.73%
Straight Aqua	11th	91.6 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-3.3 Km/H	96.52%
Curved Aquaplaning	16th	3.3 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.67 m/sec2	83.12%

Comfort

94.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	11th	72 dB	70.6 dB	+1.4 dB	98.06%

Value

84.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	5th	52080 KM	63830 KM	-11750 KM	81.59%
Value	10th	12.86 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+1.85 Price/1000	85.61%
Rolling Resistance	7th	7.71 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+1.04 kg / t	86.51%
Abrasion	3rd	1305 g	1122 g	+183 g	85.98%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

13^th

Yokohama Advan Sport V107

102Y

• EU Label: D/A/71
• Origin: Japan
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 12.08 kgs
• Price: 640.00

The Yokohama Advan Sport V107 finishes thirteenth with strong dry handling qualities and the highest straight aquaplaning resistance in the test. However, it carries the highest rolling resistance figure of all finalists, which directly increases fuel or energy consumption. It also scores weaker in wet handling relative to the top tier, and the overall cost rating is pulled down by higher running costs.

Dry

94.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	4th	34.1 M	32.8 M	+1.3 M	96.19%
Dry Handling	4th	100.8 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-0.7 Km/H	99.31%
Subj. Dry Handling	3rd	8.7 Points	10 Points	-1.3 Points	87%

Wet

90.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	20th	47.9 M	39.3 M	+8.6 M	82.05%
Wet Handling	13th	82 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1.6 Km/H	98.09%
Subj. Wet Handling	11th	7.3 Points	8.7 Points	-1.4 Points	83.91%
Wet Circle	14th	14.95 s	14.51 s	+0.44 s	97.06%
Straight Aqua	5th	93 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-1.9 Km/H	98%
Curved Aquaplaning	15th	3.31 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.66 m/sec2	83.38%

Comfort

93.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	16th	73.1 dB	70.6 dB	+2.5 dB	96.58%

Value

69.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	15th	45630 KM	63830 KM	-18200 KM	71.49%
Value	11th	14.03 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+3.02 Price/1000	78.47%
Rolling Resistance	20th	10.1 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+3.43 kg / t	66.04%
Abrasion	18th	1794 g	1122 g	+672 g	62.54%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

16^th

Linglong Sport Master

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/69
• Origin: Serbia
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 12.60 kgs
• Price: 450.00

The Linglong Sport Master finishes sixteenth - the lowest-priced tire in the finalist group - and produces the shortest wet braking distance of the entire test at 39.3 m, the only tire to stop under 40 m from 100 km/h in the wet. Dry braking is also competitive. The main limitation is mileage, which is the lowest of all twenty finalists, meaning the low purchase price advantage is partially offset by more frequent replacement.

Dry

84.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	2nd	33.9 M	32.8 M	+1.1 M	96.76%
Dry Handling	17th	99.3 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-2.2 Km/H	97.83%
Subj. Dry Handling	17th	6 Points	10 Points	-4 Points	60%

Wet

95.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	1st	39.3 M			100%
Wet Handling	7th	82.4 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1.2 Km/H	98.56%
Subj. Wet Handling	4th	8 Points	8.7 Points	-0.7 Points	91.95%
Wet Circle	9th	14.74 s	14.51 s	+0.23 s	98.44%
Straight Aqua	8th	92.8 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-2.1 Km/H	97.79%
Curved Aquaplaning	13th	3.38 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.59 m/sec2	85.14%

Comfort

94.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	12th	72.4 dB	70.6 dB	+1.8 dB	97.51%

Value

67.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	20th	35570 KM	63830 KM	-28260 KM	55.73%
Value	9th	12.65 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+1.64 Price/1000	87.04%
Rolling Resistance	19th	9.15 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+2.48 kg / t	72.9%
Abrasion	20th	2022 g	1122 g	+900 g	55.49%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

17^th

Toyo Proxes Sport 2

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/71
• Origin: Japan
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 11.69 kgs
• Price: 630.00

The Toyo Proxes Sport 2 finishes seventeenth with strong dry handling and the highest resistance to straight aquaplaning in the test. Dry braking is competitive. The significant weakness is a short projected mileage, one of the lowest in the group, which substantially increases cost-per-km. Wet performance is adequate but not a strength.

Dry

93.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	14th	34.6 M	32.8 M	+1.8 M	94.8%
Dry Handling	5th	100.7 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-0.8 Km/H	99.21%
Subj. Dry Handling	3rd	8.7 Points	10 Points	-1.3 Points	87%

Wet

89.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	17th	46.1 M	39.3 M	+6.8 M	85.25%
Wet Handling	15th	81.8 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-1.8 Km/H	97.85%
Subj. Wet Handling	17th	6 Points	8.7 Points	-2.7 Points	68.97%
Wet Circle	18th	15.29 s	14.51 s	+0.78 s	94.9%
Straight Aqua	1st	94.9 Km/H			100%
Curved Aquaplaning	7th	3.51 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.46 m/sec2	88.41%

Comfort

95.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	5th	71.3 dB	70.6 dB	+0.7 dB	99.02%

Value

67.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	19th	38420 KM	63830 KM	-25410 KM	60.19%
Value	19th	16.4 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+5.39 Price/1000	67.13%
Rolling Resistance	14th	8.61 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+1.94 kg / t	77.47%
Abrasion	16th	1734 g	1122 g	+612 g	64.71%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

18^th

Maxxis Victra Sport 6

102Y

• EU Label: C/A/72
• Origin: China
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 12.11 kgs
• Price: 560.00

The Maxxis Victra Sport 6 finishes eighteenth with competitive dry braking and a low purchase price. However, wet handling is rated as imprecise, with vague behaviour reducing confidence in wet cornering. Tread wear is high - one of the highest in the test - which contributes to an elevated cost-per-km figure and limits the value proposition of the low upfront price.

Dry

93.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	17th	35.1 M	32.8 M	+2.3 M	93.45%
Dry Handling	6th	100.6 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-0.9 Km/H	99.11%
Subj. Dry Handling	3rd	8.7 Points	10 Points	-1.3 Points	87%

Wet

85.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	14th	44.9 M	39.3 M	+5.6 M	87.53%
Wet Handling	18th	80.7 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-2.9 Km/H	96.53%
Subj. Wet Handling	19th	5.3 Points	8.7 Points	-3.4 Points	60.92%
Wet Circle	20th	15.51 s	14.51 s	+1 s	93.55%
Straight Aqua	20th	89.2 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-5.7 Km/H	93.99%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.16 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.81 m/sec2	79.6%

Comfort

91%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	18th	6.7 Points	8 Points	-1.3 Points	83.75%
Noise	7th	71.8 dB	70.6 dB	+1.2 dB	98.33%

Value

70.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	18th	39670 KM	63830 KM	-24160 KM	62.15%
Value	12th	14.12 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+3.11 Price/1000	77.97%
Rolling Resistance	11th	8.08 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+1.41 kg / t	82.55%
Abrasion	19th	1875 g	1122 g	+753 g	59.84%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

19^th

Kleber Dynaxer HP5

102Y

• EU Label: B/A/70
• Origin: Romania
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 10.62 kgs
• Price: 630.00

The Kleber Dynaxer HP5 finishes nineteenth with the lowest rolling resistance of all twenty finalists, which translates to measurably lower fuel or energy consumption. Projected mileage is reasonable and tread wear is the lowest recorded in the test. The main limitation is wet grip, where braking distances and lateral performance are below the mid-field, requiring more caution in wet conditions.

Dry

81.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	15th	34.9 M	32.8 M	+2.1 M	93.98%
Dry Handling	19th	98.9 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-2.6 Km/H	97.44%
Subj. Dry Handling	18th	5.3 Points	10 Points	-4.7 Points	53%

Wet

86.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	18th	46.7 M	39.3 M	+7.4 M	84.15%
Wet Handling	20th	79.4 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-4.2 Km/H	94.98%
Subj. Wet Handling	17th	6 Points	8.7 Points	-2.7 Points	68.97%
Wet Circle	17th	15.28 s	14.51 s	+0.77 s	94.96%
Straight Aqua	19th	89.3 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-5.6 Km/H	94.1%
Curved Aquaplaning	18th	3.18 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.79 m/sec2	80.1%

Comfort

94.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	7th	71.8 dB	70.6 dB	+1.2 dB	98.33%

Value

91.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	8th	50240 KM	63830 KM	-13590 KM	78.71%
Value	8th	12.54 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+1.53 Price/1000	87.8%
Rolling Resistance	1st	6.67 kg / t			100%
Abrasion	1st	1122 g			100%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

19^th

Sava Intensa UHP 2

102Y

• EU Label: B/A/71
• Origin: Germany
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 10.07 kgs
• Price: 570.00

The Sava Intensa UHP 2 also finishes nineteenth and shares the lowest rolling resistance with Kleber. Dry braking is adequate and tire weight is the lowest of all finalists. However, wet performance is a clear weakness - braking distances are among the longest in the final group and handling is rated as imprecise. The overall wet safety margin is the main concern for this tire.

Dry

81.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	18th	35.2 M	32.8 M	+2.4 M	93.18%
Dry Handling	18th	99 Km/H	101.5 Km/H	-2.5 Km/H	97.54%
Subj. Dry Handling	18th	5.3 Points	10 Points	-4.7 Points	53%

Wet

86.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	19th	47.1 M	39.3 M	+7.8 M	83.44%
Wet Handling	19th	80.6 Km/H	83.6 Km/H	-3 Km/H	96.41%
Subj. Wet Handling	19th	5.3 Points	8.7 Points	-3.4 Points	60.92%
Wet Circle	19th	15.48 s	14.51 s	+0.97 s	93.73%
Straight Aqua	15th	90.4 Km/H	94.9 Km/H	-4.5 Km/H	95.26%
Curved Aquaplaning	5th	3.58 m/sec2	3.97 m/sec2	-0.39 m/sec2	90.18%

Comfort

94.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7.3 Points	8 Points	-0.7 Points	91.25%
Noise	14th	72.5 dB	70.6 dB	+1.9 dB	97.38%

Value

82.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	12th	48530 KM	63830 KM	-15300 KM	76.03%
Value	3rd	11.75 Price/1000	11.01 Price/1000	+0.74 Price/1000	93.7%
Rolling Resistance	3rd	7.56 kg / t	6.67 kg / t	+0.89 kg / t	88.23%
Abrasion	9th	1521 g	1122 g	+399 g	73.77%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts