Auto Bild's second summer tyre test of 2019 has tested eleven 245/45 R18 tyre patterns using a BMW 5 Series. This tyre and vehicle combination isn't an often tested setup, and has yielded some interesting results!
The Pirelli P Zero PZ4 (Sports Car variant) dominated the testing, with the shortest dry and wet braking, fastest wet handling lap and second fastest dry handling lap.
With the Pirelli dominating, that left the usual top three trio battling out for second place overall, which went in favour of the new Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5, whos only draw back was a mid table rolling resistance score. The last of the podium spots went to the Continental PremiumContact 6 which proved to be a little noisy compared to the best.
The fan favourite, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4, had to settle for a joint fourth place overall with the Vredestein Ultrac Vorti.
Dry
The Pirelli P Zero SC had a huge dry braking advantage, 0.6 meters ahead of the next best.
Dry Braking
Spread: 2.40 M (6.8%)|Avg: 36.22 M
Dry braking in meters (Lower is better)
Dry Braking: Safety Impact: Best vs Worst Tyre
The Vredestein Ultrac Vorti took its regular spot at the top of the dry handling testing, with the P Zero a close second.
Dry Handling
Spread: 3.30 Km/H (3.3%)|Avg: 98.52 Km/H
Dry Handling Average Speed (Higher is better)
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
100.00 Km/H
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
99.80 Km/H
Continental Premium Contact 6
99.20 Km/H
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
99.20 Km/H
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
99.00 Km/H
Toyo Proxes Sport
98.40 Km/H
Nokian PowerProof
98.30 Km/H
Maxxis Premitra HP5
98.20 Km/H
Hankook Ventus S1 evo2
97.70 Km/H
Fulda SportControl 2
97.20 Km/H
Bridgestone Turanza T005
96.70 Km/H
Wet
The Pirelli once again proved its braking dominance, stopping 2 meters shorter than the second placed Asymmetric 5.
Wet Braking
Spread: 9.50 M (20.3%)|Avg: 52.60 M
Wet braking in meters (Lower is better)
Wet Braking: Safety Impact: Best vs Worst Tyre
This time the Pirelli carried through the performance advantage to wet handling, as the fastest tyre on test.
Wet Handling
Spread: 8.30 Km/H (9.4%)|Avg: 83.48 Km/H
Wet Handling Average Speed (Higher is better)
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
88.10 Km/H
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
87.70 Km/H
Continental Premium Contact 6
85.50 Km/H
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
85.40 Km/H
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
85.00 Km/H
Hankook Ventus S1 evo2
82.50 Km/H
Maxxis Premitra HP5
82.30 Km/H
Nokian PowerProof
80.90 Km/H
Bridgestone Turanza T005
80.80 Km/H
Fulda SportControl 2
80.30 Km/H
Toyo Proxes Sport
79.80 Km/H
The Michelin Pilot Sport 4 took its first win of the test during straight aquaplaning testing.
Straight Aqua
Spread: 5.10 Km/H (5.5%)|Avg: 89.48 Km/H
Float Speed in Km/H (Higher is better)
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
92.10 Km/H
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
91.20 Km/H
Hankook Ventus S1 evo2
91.00 Km/H
Toyo Proxes Sport
90.80 Km/H
Maxxis Premitra HP5
89.40 Km/H
Continental Premium Contact 6
89.40 Km/H
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
88.90 Km/H
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
88.60 Km/H
Bridgestone Turanza T005
88.30 Km/H
Nokian PowerProof
87.60 Km/H
Fulda SportControl 2
87.00 Km/H
Environment
Three tyres proved to be the most comfortable subjectively.
Subj. Comfort
Spread: 3.00 Points (42.9%)|Avg: 5.82 Points
Subjective Comfort Score (Higher is better)
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
7.00 Points
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
7.00 Points
Bridgestone Turanza T005
7.00 Points
Hankook Ventus S1 evo2
6.00 Points
Continental Premium Contact 6
6.00 Points
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
6.00 Points
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
6.00 Points
Maxxis Premitra HP5
5.00 Points
Fulda SportControl 2
5.00 Points
Nokian PowerProof
5.00 Points
Toyo Proxes Sport
4.00 Points
The Bridgestone continued its run of extremely low rolling resistance scores by having the lowest fuel use on test.
Rolling Resistance
Spread: 2.38 kg / t (32.6%)|Avg: 8.49 kg / t
Rolling resistance in kg t (Lower is better)
Bridgestone Turanza T005
7.31 kg / t
Fulda SportControl 2
7.63 kg / t
Continental Premium Contact 6
8.01 kg / t
Maxxis Premitra HP5
8.09 kg / t
Nokian PowerProof
8.09 kg / t
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
8.30 kg / t
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
8.74 kg / t
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
8.95 kg / t
Hankook Ventus S1 evo2
9.04 kg / t
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
9.54 kg / t
Toyo Proxes Sport
9.69 kg / t
19,000 km
£1.45/L
8.0 L/100km
--
Annual Difference
--
Lifetime Savings
--
Extra Fuel/Energy
--
Extra CO2
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 tyre age. For comparative purposes only. Lifetime savings based on a 40,000km / 25,000 mile tread life.
External noise on the graph, internal on the comment above. Which is it, as there is not much correlation between the two? Wanting to buy the premium contact 6 (PC6) for low INTERNAL noise, autoexpress testing it on a GTI (similar to my car) was good for internal noise and significantly better than PS4, this result makes me wonder...
When you tested the PC6 recently, did you run it over rough asphalt/concrete? Was it noisy? Thanks!
Thanks, better to rely on the noise test done with a similar cars and don't get scared off by these very different results... on a very different car. Noise is very difficult overall, so many variables. Now taking a gamble with a much more intesting tyre for me, the GYF1SS :)
I'm a little overloaded with work at the moment so rushing but of the smaller tests out, have you examples? I just scanned the article and couldn't see anything obvious.
Two examples might suffice: 1. AS3 & PC6 are described as excellent & good dry handlers respectively. The bar graph scores are identical. 2. PZ4 & UV are described as excellent & very good dry handlers respectively. The bar graph scores reverse this order.
External noise on the graph, internal on the comment above. Which is it, as there is not much correlation between the two? Wanting to buy the premium contact 6 (PC6) for low INTERNAL noise, autoexpress testing it on a GTI (similar to my car) was good for internal noise and significantly better than PS4, this result makes me wonder...
When you tested the PC6 recently, did you run it over rough asphalt/concrete? Was it noisy? Thanks!
(buying 235/40R18 size)
Internal, our database can only show external at the moment. I'll get that updated.
If you watch the video NVH is discussed near the end. The Asym 5 was the best internally. The PC6 maybe a tiny bit better than the Asym 3
Thanks, better to rely on the noise test done with a similar cars and don't get scared off by these very different results... on a very different car. Noise is very difficult overall, so many variables.
Now taking a gamble with a much more intesting tyre for me, the GYF1SS :)
Amazing, let me know how you find them! :)
The Autobild sports car has already used the Bmw 5 Series vehicle in the UHP winter tires of the same size:
http://www.tyrereviews.co.u...
It is a surprise that the Falken Azenis 510 has not been included in this test. This tire is very popular among Bmw drivers in my homeland.
A strange mismatch of summary remarks & graph results at times - ???
I'm a little overloaded with work at the moment so rushing but of the smaller tests out, have you examples? I just scanned the article and couldn't see anything obvious.
Two examples might suffice:
1. AS3 & PC6 are described as excellent & good dry handlers respectively. The bar graph scores are identical.
2. PZ4 & UV are described as excellent & very good dry handlers respectively. The bar graph scores reverse this order.
Ah you meant the tyre notes!
I'll look into this further, I feel like the translation sometimes gets things a little different from the original intent.
yep; ta.