Below is the data from TUV report 713349044-PM which was created independantly at the request of Goodyear to benchmark their new tire, the Goodyear Vector All Season 4.

It's important to note that TUV only provides data in terms of percentages, so we have recalculated this based on averages for the test criteria. The distances and times below are not literal; they are all based on calculated averages and the percentage is provided by TUV. The gaps between the tires is accurate.

We have also applied our own score weighting to the final results, which you can see on the results table page to make it fall in line more with how a Tire Reviews test is scored.

Now we have said all that, it looks like it is a strong start for the new Goodyear Vector All Season 4!

Dry

The Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 stopped shortest, ahead of the Continental and Michelin which were within a tenth of a meter of each other. The new Goodyear and Bridgestone tied at the back of the field, though the gap from first to last was small.

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	127 ft	Best
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	130 ft	+3 ft
3Michelin CrossClimate 2	131 ft	+4 ft
4Goodyear Vector All Season 4	131 ft	+4 ft
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	131 ft	+4 ft

The difference between best and worst was 3.4% (4 ft).

The Goodyear Vector All Season 4 led the dry handling test, with the Continental, Pirelli and Michelin all finishing within half a second of each other. The Bridgestone was the slowest around the 10,105 feet circuit.

Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Goodyear Vector All Season 4	80 s	Best
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	80.89 s	+0.89 s
3Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	81.22 s	+1.22 s
4Michelin CrossClimate 2	81.47 s	+1.47 s
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	82.73 s	+2.73 s

The difference between best and worst was 3.4% (2.73 s).

Wet

The Goodyear took the win in wet braking, with the Continental and Pirelli effectively tied for second. The Michelin was the weakest performer here, stopping 8 feet later than the Goodyear.

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Goodyear Vector All Season 4	115 ft	Best
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	115 ft	0 ft
3Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	115 ft	0 ft
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	120 ft	+5 ft
5Michelin CrossClimate 2	123 ft	+8 ft

The difference between best and worst was 7.2% (8 ft ≈ 0.6 Car Lengths).

The low grip surface produced the largest spread of any wet test, with 25 feet separating the Goodyear from the Bridgestone. The Continental and Pirelli held second and third, while the Michelin and Bridgestone struggled most when grip levels dropped.

Wet Braking - Low Grip
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Goodyear Vector All Season 4	148 ft	Best
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	161 ft	+13 ft
3Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	163 ft	+15 ft
4Michelin CrossClimate 2	171 ft	+23 ft
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	172 ft	+24 ft

The difference between best and worst was 16.8% (24 ft ≈ 1.7 Car Lengths).

The Goodyear was fastest around the wet handling circuit, with the Pirelli closest behind. The Michelin's strong snow performance did not carry over here, finishing slowest along with the Bridgestone.

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Goodyear Vector All Season 4	85 s	Best
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	87.09 s	+2.09 s
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	88.91 s	+3.91 s
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	90.33 s	+5.33 s
5Michelin CrossClimate 2	91.01 s	+6.01 s

The difference between best and worst was 7.1% (6.01 s).

The Michelin and Pirelli resisted aquaplaning best, both clearing 55 mph before losing contact with the road.

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	55.0 mph	Best
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	54.7 mph	-0.3 mph
3Goodyear Vector All Season 4	53.4 mph	-1.6 mph
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	53.2 mph	-1.8 mph
5Continental AllSeasonContact 2	51.7 mph	-3.3 mph

The difference between best and worst was 6% (3.3 mph).

Snow

The Michelin CrossClimate 2 stopped shortest on snow, with the Goodyear next and the rest of the field grouped very closely.

Snow Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	57 ft	Best
2Goodyear Vector All Season 4	57 ft	0 ft
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	59 ft	+2 ft
4Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	60 ft	+3 ft
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	60 ft	+3 ft

The difference between best and worst was 5.3% (3 ft).

The Michelin again led on snow traction. The Bridgestone was slowest off the line.

Snow Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	2.87 s	Best
2Goodyear Vector All Season 4	3 s	+0.13 s
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	3.09 s	+0.22 s
4Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	3.15 s	+0.28 s
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	3.19 s	+0.32 s

The difference between best and worst was 11.1% (0.32 s).

The Michelin was fastest around the snow handling circuit, continuing its strong winter performance. The Goodyear took second, and the Bridgestone was again the slowest of the group.

Snow Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	78.05 s	Best
2Goodyear Vector All Season 4	80 s	+1.95 s
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	82.73 s	+4.68 s
4Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	84.48 s	+6.43 s
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	86.11 s	+8.06 s

The difference between best and worst was 10.3% (8.06 s).

Value

The Michelin had the lowest rolling resistance, followed by the Continental and Goodyear which were close together. The Pirelli was the least efficient by a clear margin, with the Bridgestone not far behind it.

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	7.1 kg/t	Best	$0
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	7.4 kg/t	+0.30 kg/t	$12
3Goodyear Vector All Season 4	7.5 kg/t	+0.40 kg/t	$17
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	8.44 kg/t	+1.34 kg/t	$55
5Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	9 kg/t	+1.90 kg/t	$79

The difference between best and worst was 26.8% (1.9 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 uses about 22 gal ($79) more fuel than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.

Gas/Diesel Electric

Annual Mileage

12,000 mi

km (L)

miles (US gal)

Fuel Price

$3.60/gal

GBP (£)

EUR (€)

USD ($)

Set my vehicle consumption

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.

Results

The Goodyear Vector All Season 4 took the overall win on the strength of its wet performance, with the Michelin CrossClimate 2 leading the snow tests but giving up ground in the wet, and the Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6 finishing last after weak results across most categories.

Dry98.1%

Wet99.7%

Snow97.5%

Rolling Resistance94.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	4^th / 5	131 ft	+4 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	1^st / 5	80 s	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 5	115 ft	Best in this discipline
Wet Braking - Low GripLower is better	1^st / 5	148 ft	Best in this discipline
Wet HandlingLower is better	1^st / 5	85 s	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 5	53.4 mph	-1.6 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 5	57 ft	0 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	2^nd / 5	3 s	+0.13 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 5	80 s	+1.95 s
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	3^rd / 5	7.5 kg/t	+0.40 kg/t

Dry98.2%

Wet95.5%

Snow94.7%

Rolling Resistance96%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 5	130 ft	+3 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 5	80.89 s	+0.89 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 5	115 ft	0 ft
Wet Braking - Low GripLower is better	2^nd / 5	161 ft	+13 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 5	88.91 s	+3.91 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	5^th / 5	51.7 mph	-3.3 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 5	59 ft	+2 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	3^rd / 5	3.09 s	+0.22 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 5	82.73 s	+4.68 s
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	2^nd / 5	7.4 kg/t	+0.30 kg/t

Dry97.6%

Wet91.9%

Snow100%

Rolling Resistance100%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 5	131 ft	+4 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	4^th / 5	81.47 s	+1.47 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	5^th / 5	123 ft	+8 ft
Wet Braking - Low GripLower is better	4^th / 5	171 ft	+23 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	5^th / 5	91.01 s	+6.01 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	1^st / 5	55.0 mph	Best in this discipline
Snow BrakingLower is better	1^st / 5	57 ft	Best in this discipline
Snow TractionLower is better	1^st / 5	2.87 s	Best in this discipline
Snow HandlingLower is better	1^st / 5	78.05 s	Best in this discipline
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	1^st / 5	7.1 kg/t	Best in this discipline

Dry99.4%

Wet96.3%

Snow93.2%

Rolling Resistance78.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	1^st / 5	127 ft	Best in this discipline
Dry HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 5	81.22 s	+1.22 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 5	115 ft	0 ft
Wet Braking - Low GripLower is better	3^rd / 5	163 ft	+15 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 5	87.09 s	+2.09 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 5	54.7 mph	-0.3 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	4^th / 5	60 ft	+3 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	4^th / 5	3.15 s	+0.28 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	4^th / 5	84.48 s	+6.43 s
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	5^th / 5	9 kg/t	+1.90 kg/t

Dry96.7%

Wet92.3%

Snow92.2%

Rolling Resistance84.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	5^th / 5	131 ft	+4 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	5^th / 5	82.73 s	+2.73 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	4^th / 5	120 ft	+5 ft
Wet Braking - Low GripLower is better	5^th / 5	172 ft	+24 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	4^th / 5	90.33 s	+5.33 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	4^th / 5	53.2 mph	-1.8 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	5^th / 5	60 ft	+3 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	5^th / 5	3.19 s	+0.32 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	5^th / 5	86.11 s	+8.06 s
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	4^th / 5	8.44 kg/t	+1.34 kg/t

Discussion

5 comments

Mirko8686 May 7, 2026

It looks much better now. The TUV report 713349044-PM is reachable by google on Goodyear site. You can also put the starting and ending speeds in the tables with braking. On dry 100-0, on wet 80-20, on snow 40-5 km/h. TUV decided to measure the braking deceleration, not the braking distance and show it in %. You know the deceleration value f. e. for Michelin, in that size and computed it for other tires and converted to meters? Than OK. TUV did not do the wet and snow braking measurement to 0 km/h. There is a slipping peak from abs close to the end of the braking distance. Which I think will affect their averages. But we will see only in Your real test, where You brake to 0 km/h, if these TUV results were accurate and how much. It will be a great tire, no discussion about that.

#10624
1. TireReviews Mirko8686 May 10, 2026
  
  Thank you. Even when braking distances are presented at 0 mph, it's always a calculated figure. Most independent tests measure 80 to 5 for wet and then calculate to 0 to 100. I know for certain this is what autobild does.
  
  As for the new Goodyear, I believe it to be as good as the two tests currently show. I have a full test of it which I'll publish later this year as the conditions become more all-season-like. I don't think anyone's going to be disappointed with this new product but time will obviously tell
  
  #10625
Mirko8686 May 5, 2026

From 130 kmh to 0 on snow on 17 meters??? From 130 kmh on wet shorter than on dry? On 35 meters? On car with 205/55 R16? These cars do braking from 100 to 0 on dry on cca. 38 m.
That test is UI in action. I like Your tests on YouTube, better do not post this kind of tests from TUV…

#10621
1. TireReviews Mirko8686 May 7, 2026
  
  There's a bug in my code and it's making some incorrect assumptions, thanks for pointing it out.
  
  #10622
2. TireReviews Mirko8686 May 7, 2026
  
  It's now fixed
  
  #10623

Menu

2026 TUV Test Report Goodyear Vector All Season 4

Tire shortlist

Goodyear Vector All Season 4

Continental AllSeasonContact 2

Michelin CrossClimate 2

Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3

Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6

Compare selected tires

The evidence behind the verdict

Dry

Dry Braking

Dry Handling

Wet

Wet Braking

Wet Braking - Low Grip

Wet Handling

Straight Aqua

Snow

Snow Braking

Snow Traction

Snow Handling

Value

Rolling Resistance

Results

Goodyear Vector All Season 4

Continental AllSeasonContact 2

Michelin CrossClimate 2

Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3

Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6

Cross-check this test

2026 Auto Bild All Season Tire Test

2026 All Season Tire Braking Test - 30 Sets

2026 Auto Bild Allrad SUV All Season Tire Test

Discussion

My tires

Saved tires