P5 of 12
Beat 36% of the field
Continental Eco Contact 5 Test Results
Tested 2012 to 2018
3 publications
Tested 6 times by independent publications, the Continental Eco Contact 5 has taken 2 test wins with an average finish of 6th.
- 6Independent tests
- 2Test wins
- 2Podium finishes
- 6thAverage finish
- 55%Field beaten on average
- 3Publications
6 tests, 2012 to 2018
- Test win
- Second
- Third
- Average 55%
Record by discipline
Where the Continental Eco Contact 5 finished in each measured discipline, across every test that measured it against at least two other tires. Field beaten is the share of the other tires it outranked in that measurement.
| Discipline | Tests | Avg finish | Field beaten | Firsts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry | ||||
| Dry Braking | 1 | P8 of 12 | 36% | - |
| Wet | ||||
| Wet Braking | 1 | P3 of 12 | 82% | - |
| Straight Aqua | 1 | P11 of 12 | 9% | - |
| Value | ||||
| Rolling Resistance | 1 | P1 of 12 | 100% | 1 |
Head-to-head record
Overall finishing position against the tires that have most often shared a test with the Continental Eco Contact 5. Only tires tested alongside it at least three times are listed.
| Rival | Shared tests | Ahead | Behind | Level | Finished ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Michelin Energy Saver+
3 shared: 3 ahead, 0 behind
|
3 | 3 | 0 | - | 100% |
 Hankook K425 Kinergy Eco
3 shared: 3 ahead, 0 behind
|
3 | 3 | 0 | - | 100% |
 Bridgestone Turanza T001
3 shared: 1 ahead, 2 behind
|
3 | 1 | 2 | - | 33% |
Against its own line
The same record for the tire it replaced and the tire that replaced it.
| Tire | Tests | Wins | Avg finish | Field beaten |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Continental Eco Contact 3 Predecessor | 1 | 1 | 1st | 100% |
| Continental Eco Contact 5 This tire | 6 | 2 | 6th | 55% |
| Continental EcoContact 6 Successor | 7 | 0 | 11th | 33% |
Performance Analysis
Drawn from 6 tests. Updated October 15, 2025.
Continental Eco Contact 5 shows a mixed but generally competent profile across six tests. It has standout wins in smaller sizes (1/16 in ADAC 2014 175/65 R14; 1/15 in 2012 European 165/70 R14), indicating strong efficiency-focused tuning that ADAC often rewards. Mid-size 205/55 R16 results are more variable, ranging from mid-pack to below average (5/12 in 2018; 14/19 in 2015; 6/8 in 2012), suggesting performance drops as size increases or under broader handling/braking weightings. Wet braking can be competitive (3/12 in 2018), while aquaplaning and some dry metrics lag in tougher fields. Rolling resistance is a clear strength.
Overall, it excels in efficiency and can perform very well in smaller mainstream sizes, but exhibits weaknesses in aquaplaning and occasional dry performance deficits in larger sizes and more demanding comparative fields.
Performance Strengths
-
Efficiency / Rolling Resistance
Strong
Details
- 1st place rolling resistance in 2018 Gute Fahrt (0.93 kg/t)
- High ADAC placements (1/16 in 2014; 1/15 in 2012) where efficiency heavily influences scoring
-
Wet Braking
Moderate
in 1 of 5 tests
Details
- 3rd/12 wet braking in 2018 (+3.5% from best) in a mixed field
- ADAC overall wins (2014, 2012) typically require balanced wet safety performance
good wet braking
- 2018 Gute Fahrt Summer Tire Test (2018)
-
Overall Performance in Small Sizes
Strong
Details
- 1/16 in 2014 ADAC 175/65 R14
- 1/15 in 2012 European 165/70 R14
-
Rolling resistance
Strong
in 4 of 5 tests
Details
Best rolling resistance on test
- 2018 Gute Fahrt Summer Tire Test (2018)relatively low fuel consumption and wear
- 2015 European Tire Test 205/55 R16 (2015)exceptionally good at fuel consumption and wear
- 2014 ADAC 175/65 R14 Summer Tire Test (2014)had an extremely low rolling resistance
- 2012 Auto Express Summer Tire Test (2012)
-
Dry handling
Moderate
in 2 of 5 tests
Details
the summer Continental was the standard in the dry and wet
- 2016 GF All Season Tire Test (2016)Very balanced tire with top grip on dry roads
- 2014 ADAC 175/65 R14 Summer Tire Test (2014)
-
Dry grip
Moderate
in 2 of 5 tests
Details
Good on dry roads
- 2015 European Tire Test 205/55 R16 (2015)top grip on dry roads
- 2014 ADAC 175/65 R14 Summer Tire Test (2014)
-
Tread life
Moderate
in 2 of 5 tests
Details
relatively low fuel consumption and wear
- 2015 European Tire Test 205/55 R16 (2015)exceptionally good at fuel consumption and wear
- 2014 ADAC 175/65 R14 Summer Tire Test (2014)
Performance Weaknesses
-
Aquaplaning Resistance
Strong
in 1 of 5 tests
Details
- 11th/12 straight aquaplaning in 2018 (+9.6% from best)
poor aquaplaning resistance
- 2018 Gute Fahrt Summer Tire Test (2018)
-
Dry Performance (Braking/Handling) in Mid Sizes
Moderate
Details
- 8th/12 dry braking in 2018 (+5.9% from best) for 205/55 R16
- 14th/19 overall in 2015 ADAC 205/55 R16 indicating dry/handling weighting exposure
- 6th/8 overall in 2012 Auto Express 205/55 R16 in a tight field
-
Consistency Across Sizes/Tests
Moderate
Details
- Top in small-size ADAC tests (2012, 2014) vs mid-pack/bottom-half in 205/55 R16 tests (2012 AE 6/8; 2015 ADAC 14/19; 2018 GF 5/12)
-
Snow traction
Minor
in 1 of 5 tests
Details
Extremely weak on snow
- 2016 GF All Season Tire Test (2016)
Do owners agree with the tests?
Every tester write-up on the Continental Eco Contact 5 (5 tests) and 73 owner reviews were tagged for the aspects they judge. Where both have spoken, this is how they line up.
Where owners and testers agree
- Dry grip strength in 2 of 5 tests 32 praise, 2 criticise of 73 reviews · Read those reviews
- Rolling resistance strength in 4 of 5 tests 14 praise, 2 criticise of 73 reviews · Read those reviews
- Dry handling strength in 2 of 5 tests 10 praise, 2 criticise of 73 reviews · Read those reviews
- Aquaplaning resistance weakness in 1 of 5 tests 1 praise, 3 criticise of 73 reviews · Read those reviews
- Snow traction weakness in 1 of 5 tests 0 praise, 3 criticise of 73 reviews · Read those reviews
Raised by owners, not by any test of this tire
- Ride comfort no test mentions it 8 praise, 3 criticise of 73 reviews · Read those reviews
- Steering feel no test mentions it 2 praise, 7 criticise of 73 reviews · Read those reviews
- Sidewall stiffness no test mentions it 0 praise, 8 criticise of 73 reviews · Read those reviews
Every test, newest first 6
Strong = top two of the field in that measurement. Weak = bottom two.
2018 1 test
2016 1 test
P7 of 11
Beat 40% of the field
2015 1 test
P14 of 19
Beat 28% of the field
2014 1 test
P1 of 16
Beat 100% of the field
2012 2 tests
P6 of 8
Beat 29% of the field
2012 Auto Express Summer Tire Test
Continental seem to have traded rolling resistance for wet grip. The usually strong in the wet EcoContact averaged 6th best in the wet tests, and could only manage 5th for noise, but had an extremely low rolling resistance and was the best in dry braking
P1 of 15
Beat 100% of the field
Back to the Continental Eco Contact 5 overview
Owner reviews, sizes and EU label data, comparisons and the Tire Reviews score. All Continental tires