| Test Summary | |
| Wet Braking |
Continental Sport Contact 5 |
| Dry Braking |
Toyo Proxes T1 Sport |
Results
Dry: The shortest dry braking, high grip resulting in a fast lap and low rolling resistance make the Continental strong in the dry
Wet: Good braking, fast and safe handling, only let down by aquaplaning in the wet otherwise flawless
Cost: 565 Euros
Whether the road is wet or dry, the winning Continental SportContact5 is not only fast, but also very safe
Total: 263
Dry
137
Wet
126
Dry: Low rolling resistance, strong braking, precise turn: These points speak for the Sport Maxx RT. No oversteer from the rear makes it very stable
Wet: Dunlop has strong wet braking and aquaplaning results. On the handling track it reaches the limit of grip little earlier than the Conti
Cost: 575 Euros
Strong wet grip, short braking distances on dry roads and low rolling resistance: this is the recipe for success for the all-rounder from Dunlop
Total: 257
Dry
129
Wet
128
Dry: The Toyo Proxes T1 Sport is not fast in the dry, but it offers a high level of driving safety with a neutral balance
Wet: Proxes T1 Sport is a wet specialist with extremely short braking distances and balanced handling. Only in the curved aquaplaning the tyre shows slight weakness
Cost: 490 Euros
A direct hit in wet conditions, the Toyo Proxes T1 Sport. Solid results in the dry too
Total: 253
Dry
122
Wet
131
Dry: In the dry the Cinturato P7 is fast and is very safe and balanced. Good rolling resistance and slalom pace
Wet: At the limit the Cinturato P7 offers good balance with lots of grip at the front axle. Short braking distances, but the results in the curved aquaplaning tests are rather poor
Cost: 555 Euros
Pirelli Cinturato P7 is balanced at the limit - on wet and dry roads
Total: 248
Dry
127
Wet
121
Dry: With a slightly agile rear and plenty of grip when turning, the Primacy 3 is a good dry tyre. Good comfort and rolling resistance results too
Wet: Consistent wet results for the Michelin, other than average wet braking. During handling the tyre had delayed turnin with understeer, but very stable at the rear
Cost: 610 Euros
A rather inconspicuous test drives the Michelin Primacy 3 to fifth. The low rolling resistance and the driving characteristics convince the dry tests
Total: 236
Dry
125
Wet
111
Dry: The Azenis FK453 has good comfort, but the rolling resistance is high. Average grip at the front and reacts early to load changes on the rear
Wet: With good feel and a fast pace in the wet circle the Falken scores good points. It is precise, stable under braking, with the rear axle feeling sporty and agile
Cost: 405 Euros
Falken Azenis FK453 is surprisingly strong when the roads are wet, but its dry result leaves room for improvement
Total: 232
Dry
110
Wet
122
Dry: The longest dry braking distances cost the N FERA SU1 points - as well as the load-change reactions on the limit. The rolling resistance is comparatively low
Wet: During aquaplaning the Nexen floats very early, however it has strong wet braking and is balanced and quick during wet handling
Cost: 365 Euros
The revised Nexen N FERA SU1 is fundamentally solid in the wet, but in the curved aquaplaning tests is floats very early
Total: 229
Dry
112
Wet
117
Dry: Like the Toyo, the Ultrac Cento is always safe. In particular, the rear axle is very stable. Average rolling resistance
Wet: Best result in curved aquaplaning, but far behind when braking. The Vredestein is slightly nervous on the rear axle
Cost: 520 Euros
Weaknesses in the driving safety (wet) test prevent a better result for the Vredestein Ultrac Cento
Total: 223
Dry
117
Wet
106
Dry: Average dry braking deceleration and rolling resistance. In handling the limit of the zline is reached early, but well balanced
Wet: Nokian is quick in the wet, but too nervous at the rear to load changes. Acceptable braking distances
Cost: 530 Euros
Oversteer in the wet, understeer on dry roads and slow in the slalom and handling
Total: 218
Dry
112
Wet
106
Dry: The dry roads is where the Turanza T001 shines. It steers precisely
Wet: A good aquaplaning result, but the braking distance of Bridgestone is too long. In handling the tyre seems to have a lack of lateral support, which also reflects in the time
Cost: 565 Euros
Long braking distances and the low driving safety on wet roads damaged the result of the Bridgestone Turanza T001
Total: 213
Dry
120
Wet
93
Dry: Yokohama missed a better position because of the very high rolling resistance. Early understeer at the limit, but fast in the slalom
Wet: Long wet braking distances and an unstable rear axle cost the Yokohama Advan Sport V105 many points
Cost: 550 Euros
In terms of wet grip and rolling resistance much is bad
Total: 203
Dry
103
Wet
100
Dry: During dry handling the new Aspire 4G is fast, but it lost points to load changes, being partially nervous at the rear . High rolling resistance
Wet: Longest braking distance, pronounced under-and oversteer in handling and early aquaplaning expose the weaknesses of the Apollo when wet
Cost: 480 Euros
When wet, the new Apollo Aspire 4G from India has reached its limit very early
Total: 185
Dry
102
Wet
83
hmm! your interpretation of 'support' was the one I initially had but it doesn't seem consistent with their remarks on dry grip. My other construal, which fitted a bit with the 'low safety' point, was not just low grip but snappiness and difficult recovery of grip loss. As the intended application is as a wet tyre at the rear of a rear-engined renault, that would concern me.
I'm asking because my 185/60-14 size is obsolescent in Australia & the T001 seemed possibly the best of an unpromising shortlist (as a wet tyre). The other available ones are the Cinturato P1 (not the Verde) & the Yoko C-Drive2. Neither get much of a press as wet tyres (the Verde seems to be an improvement but is unavailable here) but the latest two tests you've published have diminished the T001 in my assessment.
can you clarify cum expand upon the t001 comments that "the tyre seems to have a lack of lateral support" and " low driving safety on wet roads"
Hi 4cvg. Without actually being part of this test, it's hard to fully qualify, but it's probably safe to take the translation at face value, which means the T001 didn't offer great lateral support during cornering (high tyre flex) and low grip in the wet, which is a common complaint of the T001.