Test Charts / Tire Reviews

The Best All Season Tires for 2024 / 2025

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: 235/35 R19
Tires tested: 6
Disciplines: 18

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

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
RefReference Summer	113 ft	-8 ft	0 mph
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	121 ft	Best	0 mph
2Michelin CrossClimate 2	123 ft	+2 ft	11 mph
3Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	124 ft	+3 ft	12 mph
4Continental AllSeasonContact 2	126 ft	+5 ft	16 mph
RefReference Winter	132 ft	+11 ft	23 mph
5Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	132 ft	+11 ft	23 mph
RefReference Winter Avg	134 ft	+13 ft	24 mph
6Grenlander GreenWing AS	138 ft	+17 ft	28 mph

The difference between best and worst was 22.6% (25 ft ≈ 1.7 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Grenlander GreenWing AS would still be travelling at 28 mph when the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
RefReference Summer	84.3 s	-0.66 s
1Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	84.96 s	Best
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	85.84 s	+0.88 s
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	86.45 s	+1.49 s
RefReference Winter	87.02 s	+2.06 s
4Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	87.09 s	+2.13 s
5Michelin CrossClimate 2	87.41 s	+2.45 s
RefReference Winter Avg	88.24 s	+3.28 s
6Grenlander GreenWing AS	88.82 s	+3.86 s

The difference between best and worst was 5.4% (4.52 s).

Subj. Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	10 Points	Best
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	10 Points	Best
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	9 Points	-1.00 Points
4Michelin CrossClimate 2	8.5 Points	-1.50 Points
5Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	8 Points	-2.00 Points
6Grenlander GreenWing AS	4 Points	-6.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 60% (6 Points).

Wet

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
RefReference Summer	78 ft	-4 ft	0 mph
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	82 ft	Best	0 mph
2Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	87 ft	+5 ft	19 mph
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	89 ft	+7 ft	21 mph
4Michelin CrossClimate 2	89 ft	+7 ft	22 mph
5Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	90 ft	+8 ft	23 mph
RefReference Winter	100 ft	+18 ft	33 mph
RefReference Winter Avg	103 ft	+21 ft	36 mph
6Grenlander GreenWing AS	116 ft	+34 ft	43 mph

The difference between best and worst was 48% (38 ft ≈ 2.5 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Grenlander GreenWing AS would still be travelling at 43 mph when the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Wet Braking - Cool
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	84 ft	Best	0 mph
2Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	84 ft	0 ft	3 mph
RefReference Summer	86 ft	+2 ft	14 mph
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	87 ft	+3 ft	15 mph
4Michelin CrossClimate 2	87 ft	+3 ft	16 mph
5Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	88 ft	+4 ft	18 mph
RefReference Winter	91 ft	+7 ft	22 mph
RefReference Winter Avg	95 ft	+11 ft	27 mph
6Grenlander GreenWing AS	121 ft	+37 ft	45 mph

The difference between best and worst was 44.9% (37 ft ≈ 2.5 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Grenlander GreenWing AS would still be travelling at 45 mph when the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
RefReference Summer	103.02 s	-4.94 s
RefReference Winter	107.35 s	-0.61 s
1Continental AllSeasonContact 2	107.96 s	Best
2Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	108.17 s	+0.21 s
3Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	108.22 s	+0.26 s
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	108.24 s	+0.28 s
RefReference Winter Avg	110.41 s	+2.45 s
5Michelin CrossClimate 2	112.49 s	+4.53 s
6Grenlander GreenWing AS	130.47 s	+22.51 s

The difference between best and worst was 26.6% (27.45 s).

Subj. Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	10 Points	Best
2Michelin CrossClimate 2	9.5 Points	-0.50 Points
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	9.5 Points	-0.50 Points
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	9.5 Points	-0.50 Points
5Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	9 Points	-1.00 Points
6Grenlander GreenWing AS	1 Points	-9.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 90% (9 Points).

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	49.2 mph	Best
2Michelin CrossClimate 2	48.2 mph	-1.0 mph
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	47.9 mph	-1.3 mph
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	47.8 mph	-1.4 mph
RefReference Summer	47.5 mph	-1.7 mph
5Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	47.0 mph	-2.2 mph
RefReference Winter	45.4 mph	-3.8 mph
RefReference Winter Avg	44.5 mph	-4.7 mph
6Grenlander GreenWing AS	43.0 mph	-6.2 mph

The difference between best and worst was 12.5% (6.2 mph).

Curved Aquaplaning
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	8.6 ft/s²	Best
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	8.4 ft/s²	-0.2 ft/s²
RefReference Summer	8.3 ft/s²	-0.3 ft/s²
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	8.1 ft/s²	-0.5 ft/s²
4Michelin CrossClimate 2	7.5 ft/s²	-1.1 ft/s²
5Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	7.0 ft/s²	-1.6 ft/s²
RefReference Winter Avg	6.8 ft/s²	-1.8 ft/s²
6Grenlander GreenWing AS	6.3 ft/s²	-2.3 ft/s²
RefReference Winter	5.7 ft/s²	-2.9 ft/s²

The difference between best and worst was 33.2% (2.9 ft/s²).

Snow

Snow Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
RefReference Winter	57 ft	-2 ft	0 mph
RefReference Winter Avg	59 ft	0 ft	0 mph
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	59 ft	Best	0 mph
2Grenlander GreenWing AS	61 ft	+2 ft	14 mph
3Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	62 ft	+3 ft	15 mph
4Continental AllSeasonContact 2	62 ft	+3 ft	18 mph
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	64 ft	+5 ft	22 mph
6Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	66 ft	+7 ft	25 mph
RefReference Summer	148 ft	+89 ft	62 mph

The difference between best and worst was 158.6% (91 ft ≈ 6.2 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Vredestein Quatrac Pro+ would still be travelling at 25 mph when the Michelin CrossClimate 2 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Snow Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
RefReference Winter	5.16 s	-0.15 s
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	5.31 s	Best
RefReference Winter Avg	5.38 s	+0.07 s
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	5.42 s	+0.11 s
3Grenlander GreenWing AS	5.53 s	+0.22 s
4Continental AllSeasonContact 2	5.6 s	+0.29 s
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	5.69 s	+0.38 s
6Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	5.95 s	+0.64 s
RefReference Summer	29.97 s	+24.66 s

The difference between best and worst was 480.8% (24.81 s).

Snow Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
RefReference Winter	78.28 s	-1.37 s
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	79.65 s	Best
RefReference Winter Avg	79.74 s	+0.09 s
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	81.84 s	+2.19 s
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	82.72 s	+3.07 s
4Grenlander GreenWing AS	83.33 s	+3.68 s
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	84.76 s	+5.11 s
6Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	85.69 s	+6.04 s
RefReference Summer	143.3 s	+63.65 s

The difference between best and worst was 83.1% (65.02 s).

Subj. Snow Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	10 Points	Best
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	9.5 Points	-0.50 Points
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	9 Points	-1.00 Points
4Grenlander GreenWing AS	8.5 Points	-1.50 Points
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	8 Points	-2.00 Points
5Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	8 Points	-2.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 20% (2 Points).

Ice

Ice Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Grenlander GreenWing AS	30 ft	Best	0 mph
RefReference Winter	31 ft	+1 ft	17 mph
2Michelin CrossClimate 2	33 ft	+3 ft	24 mph
RefReference Winter Avg	33 ft	+3 ft	26 mph
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	34 ft	+4 ft	29 mph
4Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	34 ft	+4 ft	30 mph
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	36 ft	+6 ft	34 mph
6Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	37 ft	+7 ft	36 mph
RefReference Summer	106 ft	+76 ft	68 mph

The difference between best and worst was 256.5% (76 ft ≈ 5.1 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Vredestein Quatrac Pro+ would still be travelling at 36 mph when the Grenlander GreenWing AS had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Ice Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
RefReference Winter	4.5 s	0.00 s
1Grenlander GreenWing AS	4.5 s	Best
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	4.57 s	+0.07 s
3Michelin CrossClimate 2	4.7 s	+0.20 s
RefReference Winter Avg	4.82 s	+0.32 s
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	5.15 s	+0.65 s
5Continental AllSeasonContact 2	5.29 s	+0.79 s
6Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	5.47 s	+0.97 s
RefReference Summer	17.55 s	+13.05 s

The difference between best and worst was 290% (13.05 s).

Comfort

Subj. Comfort
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental AllSeasonContact 2	10 Points	Best
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	10 Points	Best
3Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	9.5 Points	-0.50 Points
4Michelin CrossClimate 2	9 Points	-1.00 Points
4Grenlander GreenWing AS	9 Points	-1.00 Points
6Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	8.5 Points	-1.50 Points

The difference between best and worst was 15% (1.5 Points).

Noise
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
RefReference Winter	71.4 dB	-0.60 dB
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	72 dB	Best
2Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	72.1 dB	+0.10 dB
3Grenlander GreenWing AS	72.4 dB	+0.40 dB
RefReference Winter Avg	72.72 dB	+0.72 dB
4Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	72.9 dB	+0.90 dB
5Continental AllSeasonContact 2	73 dB	+1.00 dB
RefReference Summer	73.3 dB	+1.30 dB
6Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	73.8 dB	+1.80 dB

The difference between best and worst was 3.4% (2.4 dB).

Value

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	7.76 kg/t	Best	$0
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	7.99 kg/t	+0.23 kg/t	$9
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	8.31 kg/t	+0.55 kg/t	$21
4Grenlander GreenWing AS	8.54 kg/t	+0.78 kg/t	$30
RefReference Winter	8.65 kg/t	+0.89 kg/t	$34
RefReference Winter Avg	8.78 kg/t	+1.02 kg/t	$39
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	9.01 kg/t	+1.25 kg/t	$47
6Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	9.68 kg/t	+1.92 kg/t	$73
RefReference Summer	9.9 kg/t	+2.14 kg/t	$81

The difference between best and worst was 27.6% (2.14 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Vredestein Quatrac Pro+ uses about 20 gal ($73) more fuel than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.

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.

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.

Test setup & methodology

The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.

Show full testing methodology

Recorded test conditions

Dry Braking: 62.1 → 3.1 mph · 77–79 °F
Wet Braking: 49.7 → 3.1 mph · 75–84 °F
Wet Braking - Cool: 49.7 → 3.1 mph · 45–48 °F
Wet Handling: 68–73 °F
Snow Braking: 24.9 → 3.1 mph · 19–23 °F
Snow Traction: 3.1 → 21.7 mph · 21–25 °F
Ice Braking: 15.5 → 3.1 mph
Ice Traction: 3.1 → 15.5 mph

Score Weighting

Weights express the scoring priorities, not how much each discipline actually changed the finishing order. The size of the performance gaps matters too. Category weights contribute to the overall score. Within each category, discipline weights divide that category’s share. Published finishing positions also need to be read alongside the editorial verdict.

Test	Within category	Share of overall score
Dry · 30%
Dry Braking	50%	15%
Dry Handling	40%	12%
Subj. Dry Handling	10%	3%
Wet · 40%
Wet Braking	25%	10%
Wet Braking - Cool	25%	10%
Wet Handling	30%	12%
Subj. Wet Handling	10%	4%
Straight Aqua	5%	2%
Curved Aquaplaning	5%	2%
Snow · 10%
Snow Braking	40%	4%
Snow Traction	20%	2%
Snow Handling	30%	3%
Subj. Snow Handling	10%	1%
Ice · 5%
Ice Braking	60%	3%
Ice Traction	40%	2%
Comfort · 5%
Subj. Comfort	50%	2.5%
Noise	50%	2.5%
Value · 10%
Rolling Resistance	100%	10%

Our standard methods

The conditions above are recorded for this test. The descriptions below explain our standard procedures; measurement windows and run counts can vary by test.

Dry Braking

For dry braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 110 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on clean, dry asphalt. I typically use an 100–5 km/h measurement window. My standard programme is five runs per tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tires are run repeatedly throughout the session to correct for changing conditions.

Dry Handling

For dry handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible so I can assess the tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tires so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable. For more track-focused products, I also do endurance testing, which is a set number of laps at race pace to determine tire wear patterns and heat resistance over longer driving.

Subj. Dry Handling

I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated dry handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behavior, mid-corner balance, corner-exit traction, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tire before evaluating each candidate.

Wet Braking

For wet braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 88 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on an asphalt surface with a controlled water film. I typically use an 80–5 km/h measurement window to isolate tire performance from variability in the initial brake application. My standard programme is eight runs per tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. To correct for changing conditions, I run reference tires repeatedly throughout the session — in wet testing, typically every three candidate test sets.

Wet Braking - Cool

This test follows the same procedure as the standard wet braking test — entry speed of 88 km/h, full ABS braking, VBOX measurement over the 80–5 km/h window — but is conducted at cooler ambient temperatures, typically below 7°C. The lower temperature allows assessment of how each tire's compound performs when cold, which is particularly relevant for all-season and winter tire evaluation. Reference tires are run at the same frequency as the standard wet braking programme.

Wet Handling

For wet handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit. I generally use specialist wet circuits with kerb-watering systems designed to maintain a consistent surface condition. ESC is disabled where possible so I can assess the tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tires so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable.

Subj. Wet Handling

I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated wet handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behavior, mid-corner balance, aquaplaning resistance, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tire before evaluating each candidate.

Straight Aqua

To measure straight-line aquaplaning resistance, I drive one side of the vehicle through a water trough of controlled depth, typically around 7 mm, while the opposite side remains on dry pavement. I enter at a fixed speed and then accelerate progressively. I define aquaplaning onset as the point at which the wheel travelling through the water exceeds a specified slip threshold relative to the dry-side reference wheel. I usually perform four runs per tire set and average the valid results.

Curved Aquaplaning

For curved aquaplaning, I use a circular track, typically around 100 meters in diameter, with a flooded arc of controlled water depth, usually about 7 mm. The vehicle is instrumented with GPS telemetry and a tri-axial accelerometer. I drive through the flooded section at progressively increasing speed, typically in 5 km/h increments, and record the minimum sustained lateral acceleration at each step. The test continues until lateral acceleration collapses, indicating complete aquaplaning. The result is expressed as remaining lateral acceleration in m/s² as speed rises.

Snow Braking

For snow braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 50 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a groomed, compacted snow surface, measuring 45-5 km/h. I generally use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tire ever brakes on the same piece of snow twice. My standard programme is twelve runs per tire set, although the sequence can extend further if the data justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. To correct for changing snow surface conditions, I run reference tires repeatedly — typically every two candidate test sets.

Snow Traction

For snow traction, I accelerate the vehicle from rest on a groomed snow surface with traction control active and measure speed and time using GPS telemetry. I typically use a 5–35 km/h measurement window to reduce the influence of launch transients and powertrain irregularities. I use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tire ever accelerates on the same piece of snow twice. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. I complete multiple runs per tire set and average the valid results. Reference tires are run typically every two candidate test sets to correct for changing snow surface conditions.

Snow Handling

For snow handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated snow handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible. The circuit is groomed and prepared after every run while tires are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, excluding laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Because snow surfaces degrade more rapidly than asphalt, control runs are carried out more frequently — typically every two candidate test sets.

Subj. Snow Handling

I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated snow handling circuit. The circuit is groomed and prepared after every run while tires are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I score steering precision, turn-in behavior, mid-corner balance, corner-exit traction, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence on snow using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tire before evaluating each candidate.

Ice Braking

For ice braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 35 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a prepared ice surface. Surface temperature is continuously monitored as ice friction properties vary substantially with temperature. My standard programme is twelve runs per tire set but with ice testing, you often do many more. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tires are run typically every two candidate test sets to correct for changing surface conditions.

Ice Traction

For ice traction, I accelerate the vehicle from rest on a prepared ice surface with traction control active and measure speed and time using GPS telemetry. I typically use a 5–35 km/h measurement window to reduce the influence of launch transients. I use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tire ever accelerates on the same piece of ice twice. Surface temperature is continuously monitored. I complete multiple runs per tire set and average the valid results, with reference tires run typically every two candidate test sets.

Subj. Comfort

To assess comfort, I drive on a wide range of road surfaces (often dedicated comfort tracks at test facilities) at speeds from 50 to 120 km/h, including smooth motorway, coarse surfaces, expansion joints, broken pavement, and sharp-edged obstacles. I evaluate primary ride quality, secondary ride quality, impact harshness, seat-transmitted vibration, and the tire's ability to absorb sharp inputs. Ratings are assigned on a 1–10 scale relative to the reference tire.

Noise

I measure external pass-by noise in accordance with UNECE Regulation 117 and ISO 13325 using the coast-by method on a compliant test surface. Calibrated microphones are positioned beside the test lane, and the vehicle coasts through the measurement zone under controlled conditions. I record the maximum A-weighted sound pressure level in dB(A), complete multiple runs over the relevant speed range, and normalise the result to the reference speed required by the procedure.

Rolling Resistance

Rolling resistance is measured under controlled laboratory conditions in accordance with ISO 28580 and UNECE Regulation 117 Annex 6. The tire is mounted on a test wheel and loaded against a large-diameter steel drum. After thermal stabilisation at the prescribed test speed, rolling resistance force is measured at the spindle and corrected according to the relevant procedure. The result is expressed as rolling resistance coefficient, typically in kg/tonne.

Read our complete testing methodology →

Tire shortlist →Read the test →

More tire tests