The BEST Performance Summer Tires for 2026 Tested!

For enthusiastic drivers subjective handling, as in how this tire reacts to steering, how balanced the tire is, and how much ability you have to adjust things mid-corner, is often more important than outright grip. In this test I take eight of the very best ultra ultra high performance summer tires and put them through my usual array of dry, wet, noise, comfort, and rolling resistance testing but with a heavy focus on subjective handling to find out which tire will make you feel the happiest when driving!

One of the most interesting aspects of this test to be the inclusion of the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2, which Michelin say is an 80% track tire and 20% road tire, whereas the rest of the tires are more road-biased. Seeing how the Michelin track product performed in a group of street tires was fascinating and some of the data will certainly surprise you. 

Testing Methodology

Test Driver

Jonathan Benson

Tire Size

235/35 R19

Test Vehicle

VW Golf 8 GTI ClubSport

Test Location

Professional Proving Ground

Tire Pressures

2.5

Test Year

2026

Tires Tested

8

Show full testing methodology Hide methodology

Every tire is tested using calibrated instrumented measurement and structured subjective assessment. Reference tires are retested throughout each session to correct for changing conditions, ensuring fair, repeatable comparisons. Multiple reference sets are used where needed so that control tire wear does not affect accuracy.

We use professional-grade testing equipment including GPS data loggers, accelerometers, and calibrated microphones. All tires are broken in and conditioned before testing begins. For full details on our equipment, preparation process, and calibration procedures, see our complete testing methodology.

Categories Tested

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 analyse 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 behaviour 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

Objective data is only part of the picture, so 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 behaviour, 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 analyse 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 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 behaviour 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

Objective data is only part of the picture, so 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 behaviour, 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.

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.

Standards: UNECE Regulation 117 ISO 13325 ISO 28580 UNECE Regulation 117 Annex 6

Read our complete testing methodology

Dry

Starting with the King Boss, in isolation it didn't feel terrible - steering reaction was acceptable and grip seemed adequate - but it was six seconds a lap down on the fastest, which tells the full story. Moving up, the Falken was a clear step forward; turn-in to lock was perhaps a touch slower than ideal but it was beautifully weighted and built up progressively, and it put in a consistent lap time. The Hankook was similar, though it wasn't quite as direct as the Falken on initial turn-in, with a very slight two-stage feel where the front and rear would build up at slightly different speeds - a small quirk but noticeable in a group this competitive.

The Continental Sport Contact 7 showed a duality I've observed before: around centre there is just a slight elasticity to the steering that isn't my favourite, but once you're genuinely committed to a corner it comes alive, turns hard and feels very stable. It's clearly leaning into its road-focused character.

The Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport was a step up in steering directness and outright grip over the Continental, Hankook, and Falken, and it was one of the few tires that got meaningfully quicker on its second lap once the compound was fully up to temperature. The one mild criticism is that before it's fully warm, it felt slightly numb on the limit - just a fraction short of the feedback of the very best here.

The Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo once again did what I can only describe as Bridgestone things. Its steering ramp-up is non-linear - you turn and then suddenly you are turning faster and faster without additional steering input - which isn't objectively ideal but delivers a genuinely thrilling, exciting feel even at sub-limit pace. On the lap it was fast, aggressive, and rewarding.

Then came the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2. Sub-limit it felt sensational, with the sharpest front-end steering reaction of the group by a small but definite margin, and wonderful granularity through the front axle. However, on lap one turn one the front bit hard and then a split second later the rear came round - I had to correct it, losing around two seconds in the opening corners. Even giving it an extra warm-up lap, and despite having clear advantages in very high-speed, high-load corners, it was bleeding small amounts of time in braking zones, low-speed corners and traction zones everywhere else.

The Pirelli P Zero R was shockingly fast. Its steering has a linear ramp-up - not quite the manic edge of the Bridgestone - but it is still very sporty and possibly the best overall front-end feel of the group. Under braking on the first lap I had to roll off and re-apply the brakes because I was stopping more quickly than I had anticipated. It was a second faster than the Bridgestone in the dry and, despite genuine effort to close the gap with the Michelin, the P Zero R was faster in almost every part of the lap. Whatever Pirelli have been doing recently, it is working.

Dry braking was very closely aligned with dry handling, which always makes me happy. That also means the Pirelli P Zero R was once again the best, Cup 2 second best, Bridgestone third and Continental fourth.

Wet

The King Boss was simply outclassed; with no useful wet grip. The Falken didn't feel especially sporty in the wet - it wasn't as direct or sharp as the rest and broke into understeer fairly early, though in absolute terms it still posted a respectable time in a very competitive field. The Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 shared the same lap time as the Falken in this test, though they arrived there very differently. The Cup 2 felt excellent on surface where it had proper contact - grippy, direct and with the nicest steering of the group - but in the deeper standing water it would lift, making the rear axle a little unpredictable. The ambient air temperature was over 18 degrees and the water temperature was warm so in the real world on the road in the wet things would be even trickier. 

The Hankook and Continental were remarkably similar to each other. Neither had quite the front-axle bite of the very fastest in the group, but both were genuinely lovely to drive - completely manageable across the full two-minute lap from damp surface to standing water with no aquaplaning concerns and a well-planted rear end.

The Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo was once again remarkable in the wet. The front-end bite was excellent, steering off-centre was quick and well-weighted, the rear remained stable throughout, and aquaplaning was rarely an issue. It was noticeably faster than the Continental and I came away once again deeply impressed by this tire.

However, the Pirelli P Zero R was faster still - another two seconds over the Bridgestone. It appeared to have unlimited front grip, allowing later turn-in, continued adjustment mid-corner, and earlier and harder power application than anything else in the group. The rear was completely planted throughout; there was no hint of the rear wanting to fight you. Both the Bridgestone and Pirelli received my highest steering enjoyment scores of the group - with hindsight the Bridgestone may have had a marginal edge in reactivity and granularity, but the Pirelli's outright grip level was simply on another level. For a tire positioned as more dry-focused, its wet performance was extraordinary.

Continental managed to just beat Pirelli in wet braking, with the Bridgestone close behind. The Pilot Sport Cup 2 did impressively well considering its low starting tread depth but it couldn't match the more road-focused tires.

Straight aquaplaning was closer than expected, given the differing natures of the products. Hankook was the best, with Continental once again at the sharp end, with the Pirelli and Michelin very close overall. It's likely curved aquaplaning would have separated these tires further.

Comfort

As always I did run subjective noise and comfort on a reasonably long road route. Unfortunately it started raining so I couldn't do subjective noise across all of the sets. However, to the three of us in the car while doing the comfort testing, it was pretty clear that the Goodyear, Continental and even the Bridgestone were very good in comfort. The Falcon, Hankook, and Pirelli were just a little bit firmer, with the Cup 2 noticeably firmer.

Again, perhaps you don't really care as you are probably willing to sacrifice some comfort for the best handling possible. I know I am. 

During the road drive I did also assess the steering response on the road, which was also very close. Goodyear was my favourite by a tiny margin on the road but Bridgestone, Michelin, and Pirelli were all excellent. I haven't scored this category but I thought it would be worth mentioning.

The external noise test had the Michelin best again, which again might be counterintuitive but that's because noise is also a factor of tread depth. The Falken was the next best. All of them were split by just 3.3% 

Value

To me, the rolling resistance of this category of tires is less important than regular summer tires, But as these are intended for everyday use, other than maybe the cup 2, the rolling resistance is still a factor so I've tested it.

The Continental and the King Boss were joint-tied for the best rolling resistance, with surprisingly the Cup 2 in third place. It's not what you would imagine when looking at that kind of category of tire, it is a track-focused product afterall so why would they care about rolling resistance, well rolling resistance is quite aligned with tread depth and void, and the Cup 2 has the lowest starting tread depth and the least pattern here so it kind of makes sense.

The rest of the tires were in a little group of their own, which is not going to make much difference in real-world other than maybe the Goodyear Eagle F1 Super Sport, which is showing its age at 10.4 kg/t.

Results

1^st

Pirelli P Zero R

235/35 R19 91Y

• EU Label: D/A/72
• Rim Protection: Medium
• Weight: 9.6 kgs
• Tread: 6.5 mm

Best in test for dry grip and also quickest in the wet, with very confidence-inspiring handling limits.

Not one of the best on efficiency and only mid-pack for comfort compared to the quietest tires.

The new Prelli P Zero R takes an impressive win overall. I don't really know where to begin with this tire. Best in dry braking, best in dry handling beating the Cup 2, best in wet handling, very close to best in wet braking. It's crazy.

If you told me at the start of the test that one tire would beat the Cup 2 in the dry and the same tire would beat the Continental in the wet, I wouldn't have believed you, but here we are.

It certainly wasn't the most comfortable and it doesn't have the lowest rolling resistance but I really don't care. This tire is awesome and I would like to fit it to everything I own; which brings me to the biggest issue with it, the size range. I think there's currently only 3 non-OE sizes, so if you are one of the blessed ones, do it, and if you're not, I've been told there are more coming very soon.

Dry

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	1st	31.7 M			100%
Dry Handling	1st	76.48 s			100%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	8.75 Points			100%

Wet

99%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	2nd	24.89 M	24.54 M	+0.35 M	98.59%
Wet Handling	1st	99.38 s			100%
Subj. Wet Handling	1st	8 Points			100%
Straight Aqua	6th	76.1 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-2.1 Km/H	97.31%

Comfort

95.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	6.75 Points	7.25 Points	-0.5 Points	93.1%
Noise	4th	73.2 dB	71.3 dB	+1.9 dB	97.4%

Value

89.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	6th	9.8 kg / t	8.8 kg / t	+1 kg / t	89.8%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

2^nd

Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo

235/35 R19 91Y

• EU Label: D/A/72
• Rim Protection: Massive
• Weight: 10.2 kgs
• Tread: 7 mm

Very strong all-round grip, especially in the wet, with direct sporty steering, predictable handling and a high subjective wet score.

Loudest tire on test.

In second place was the new Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo. Bridgestone say the Evo version of the Potenza Sport was designed to fix its two main drawbacks, which were high rolling resistance and pretty bad wear, especially on track, while retaining what we loved about the Potenza Sport, which was sharp handling and good grip in the dry and wet.

It seems like they have done that. I didn't get to do as many laps on the Sport Evo as I wanted to but my gut is telling me the track wear is significantly better than the Potenza Sport, Which was admittedly a very low bar.

As always I want to see more than just my test data to form a firm conclusion but in this test it was a very fun tire and had good grip, So it's showing a lot of promise as being a great enthusiast product.

Dry

97.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	3rd	33.2 M	31.7 M	+1.5 M	95.48%
Dry Handling	3rd	77.38 s	76.48 s	+0.9 s	98.84%
Subj. Dry Handling	3rd	8.5 Points	8.75 Points	-0.25 Points	97.14%

Wet

98.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	3rd	24.96 M	24.54 M	+0.42 M	98.32%
Wet Handling	2nd	102.58 s	99.38 s	+3.2 s	96.88%
Subj. Wet Handling	1st	8 Points			100%
Straight Aqua	5th	76.9 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-1.3 Km/H	98.34%

Comfort

96.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	2nd	7 Points	7.25 Points	-0.25 Points	96.55%
Noise	8th	73.7 dB	71.3 dB	+2.4 dB	96.74%

Value

92.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	4th	9.5 kg / t	8.8 kg / t	+0.7 kg / t	92.63%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

3^rd

Continental SportContact 7

235/35 R19 91Y

• EU Label: D/A/72
• Rim Protection: Large
• Weight: 10.2 kgs
• Tread: 6.9 mm

Best wet braking and very strong efficiency, making it a great option if you want performance without a big economy penalty.

Only mid-pack for subjective handling feel, and it didn't lead either handling lap test.

The Continental SportContact 7 finishes third. We know the SportContact 7 from a huge amount of tests, and once again my summary of it is consistent with my other recent test results. It is a very good tire. It has a lot of grip, but you can tell it's more on-road focused than a lot of these tires as it's leaning heavily into braking and has low rolling resistance and good comfort levels.

In this group its steering response and handling were just a little bit below where I would want to be for a tire that I would use on track a lot, but you can't argue with the fact that this is an excellent tire And one I continue to highly recommend.

Dry

94.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	4th	33.39 M	31.7 M	+1.69 M	94.94%
Dry Handling	4th	78.42 s	76.48 s	+1.94 s	97.53%
Subj. Dry Handling	5th	8 Points	8.75 Points	-0.75 Points	91.43%

Wet

98%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	1st	24.54 M			100%
Wet Handling	4th	104.4 s	99.38 s	+5.02 s	95.19%
Subj. Wet Handling	4th	7.75 Points	8 Points	-0.25 Points	96.88%
Straight Aqua	2nd	78 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-0.2 Km/H	99.74%

Comfort

96.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	2nd	7 Points	7.25 Points	-0.25 Points	96.55%
Noise	6th	73.6 dB	71.3 dB	+2.3 dB	96.88%

Value

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	1st	8.8 kg / t			100%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

4^th

Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport

235/35 R19 91Y

• EU Label: C/A/70
• Rim Protection: Massive
• Weight: 10.2 kgs
• Tread: 7.3 mm

Very comfortable for a performance tire, with strong wet handling and a reassuring subjective wet score.

Efficiency was worst in test and braking performance was only mid-pack in both dry and wet.

As I said throughout the test, I am very glad I had the Goodyear Eagle F1 Super Sport in the test. I really enjoyed driving it. It's reconfirmed the fact I've recommended this to a lot of people a lot of times As a fast road/track tire, every single person has been really happy with my recommendation.

I think now it's just starting to show its age. It couldn't quite match the best in the dry and its rolling resistance is very high but it is still a very good tire. I assume it's going to be priced very well for its longevity, My gut tells me this will be the best-wearing tire here, although I don't have any data to prove that, so ignore me.

Dry

94.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	7th	34.18 M	31.7 M	+2.48 M	92.74%
Dry Handling	5th	78.66 s	76.48 s	+2.18 s	97.23%
Subj. Dry Handling	4th	8.25 Points	8.75 Points	-0.5 Points	94.29%

Wet

96.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	6th	26.95 M	24.54 M	+2.41 M	91.06%
Wet Handling	3rd	102.7 s	99.38 s	+3.32 s	96.77%
Subj. Wet Handling	1st	8 Points			100%
Straight Aqua	3rd	77.6 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-0.6 Km/H	99.23%

Comfort

99.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	1st	7.25 Points			100%
Noise	3rd	72.4 dB	71.3 dB	+1.1 dB	98.48%

Value

84.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	8th	10.4 kg / t	8.8 kg / t	+1.6 kg / t	84.62%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

4^th

Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2

235/35 R19 91Y

• EU Label: D/C/70
• Rim Protection: Small
• Weight: 10.2 kgs
• Tread: 5.7 mm

Very strong dry performance with a top subjective dry score, outstanding steering, and it was the quietest tire on test.

Wet grip is tricky, as is warm up time for a street tire. The Cup 2 is excellent for its class but it will be outperformed by the more road-focused tires in real-world conditions.

I think the result for the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 is going to surprise a lot of people; it certainly surprised me. It wasn't fastest in the dry and I'm a little bit surprised that the King Boss was thoroughly beaten by the Cup 2 in the wet, given its shallow tread depth.

I think people give the cup 2 too much credit as a fully focused track tire, probably because Michelin officially say it's an 80:20 track-to-road tire.

A lot of the time it doesn't even feel that focused, especially compared to the North American 200 treadwear category. I really enjoyed this tire; however, I wouldn't rush to recommend it for a UK-based person for year-round use, I have a video demonstrating its cold, wet weather performance and it really does harden up. That's something to keep in mind. Though maybe similar tires around it will suffer similar consequences, your reviews will tell me that once you've used them.

Dry

98.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	2nd	32.97 M	31.7 M	+1.27 M	96.15%
Dry Handling	2nd	76.8 s	76.48 s	+0.32 s	99.58%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	8.75 Points			100%

Wet

92.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	7th	28.04 M	24.54 M	+3.5 M	87.52%
Wet Handling	6th	107.09 s	99.38 s	+7.71 s	92.8%
Subj. Wet Handling	6th	7.5 Points	8 Points	-0.5 Points	93.75%
Straight Aqua	6th	76.1 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-2.1 Km/H	97.31%

Comfort

93.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	8th	6.25 Points	7.25 Points	-1 Points	86.21%
Noise	1st	71.3 dB			100%

Value

95.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	3rd	9.2 kg / t	8.8 kg / t	+0.4 kg / t	95.65%

Read Reviews Test Results Buy from £384.96 Results Table Test Charts

6^th

Hankook Ventus S1 Evo Z K129

235/35 R19 91Y

• EU Label: D/A/72
• Rim Protection: Small
• Weight: 10.2 kgs
• Tread: 6.9 mm

Best aquaplaning resistance and solid wet braking give it reassuring motorway wet performance.

Dry handling feel was near the bottom of the group and it wasn't especially efficient.

The Hankook was the best in the deeper water of aquaplaning and it was slightly ahead of the Falken in the wet tests, but honestly it's hard for me to explain how the tires that came sixth and seventh overall in a test of just eight tires are still fine, but fine they certainly fine. It's just the other tires in this test are great tires for enthusiasts.

Dry

92.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	5th	33.93 M	31.7 M	+2.23 M	93.43%
Dry Handling	6th	79.15 s	76.48 s	+2.67 s	96.63%
Subj. Dry Handling	7th	7.75 Points	8.75 Points	-1 Points	88.57%

Wet

96.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	4th	25.71 M	24.54 M	+1.17 M	95.45%
Wet Handling	5th	105.19 s	99.38 s	+5.81 s	94.48%
Subj. Wet Handling	4th	7.75 Points	8 Points	-0.25 Points	96.88%
Straight Aqua	1st	78.2 Km/H			100%

Comfort

95.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	6.75 Points	7.25 Points	-0.5 Points	93.1%
Noise	5th	73.3 dB	71.3 dB	+2 dB	97.27%

Value

88.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	7th	9.9 kg / t	8.8 kg / t	+1.1 kg / t	88.89%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

7^th

Falken Azenis RS820

235/35 R19 91Y

• EU Label: D/A/70
• Rim Protection: Medium
• Weight: 10.8 kgs
• Tread: 7.1 mm

Quiet on the road and generally competitive on wet braking, making it feel like a solid performance option for daily use.

Wet handling pace and subjective wet feel were below average compared to the top tires.

The Falken Azenis RS820 performed well in noise, and in the wet it delivered a respectable braking result and decent aquaplaning performance. The main area it gave away time was wet handling, where it was towards the back of the group, and it also scored low on subjective wet handling. It's a good tire but perhaps not as focused for enthusiasts as the tires at the front end of this test.

Dry

93.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	6th	34.05 M	31.7 M	+2.35 M	93.1%
Dry Handling	7th	79.17 s	76.48 s	+2.69 s	96.6%
Subj. Dry Handling	5th	8 Points	8.75 Points	-0.75 Points	91.43%

Wet

93.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	5th	26.29 M	24.54 M	+1.75 M	93.34%
Wet Handling	7th	107.59 s	99.38 s	+8.21 s	92.37%
Subj. Wet Handling	7th	7.25 Points	8 Points	-0.75 Points	90.63%
Straight Aqua	4th	77 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-1.2 Km/H	98.47%

Comfort

96.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	6.75 Points	7.25 Points	-0.5 Points	93.1%
Noise	2nd	71.6 dB	71.3 dB	+0.3 dB	99.58%

Value

91.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	5th	9.6 kg / t	8.8 kg / t	+0.8 kg / t	91.67%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

8^th

Kingboss G866

235/35 R19 91W

• EU Label: D/C/72
• Rim Protection: Small
• Weight: 10.5 kgs
• Tread: 6.35 mm

Very low rolling resistance and a decent subjective comfort score.

Worst in test for wet and dry braking and also last on both handling laps, with very low subjective handling scores.

Not much to say about the King Boss G866. If you're an enthusiast, do not fit this tire. Come to think of it, if you're a regular person, do not fit it either. It's just bad in the wet.

Dry

84.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	8th	38.92 M	31.7 M	+7.22 M	81.45%
Dry Handling	8th	82.21 s	76.48 s	+5.73 s	93.03%
Subj. Dry Handling	8th	7 Points	8.75 Points	-1.75 Points	80%

Wet

83.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	8th	31.48 M	24.54 M	+6.94 M	77.95%
Wet Handling	8th	117.14 s	99.38 s	+17.76 s	84.84%
Subj. Wet Handling	8th	6 Points	8 Points	-2 Points	75%
Straight Aqua	8th	75 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-3.2 Km/H	95.91%

Comfort

96.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	2nd	7 Points	7.25 Points	-0.25 Points	96.55%
Noise	6th	73.6 dB	71.3 dB	+2.3 dB	96.88%

Value

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	1st	8.8 kg / t			100%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts