This is going to be a long test! The German publication Auto Bild often perform the most thorough tyre tests of any of the traditional publications, and 2019 is no exception. After taking fifty three 225/45 R17 tyre patterns through wet and dry braking testing to establish the top twenty available in the market, Auto Bild have run the best of the 17" tyres through an extremely thorough full test, and even included the often omitted wear test!
The Michelin Pilot Sport 4 continued on from a very strong run of results in 2018 to win the test overall, with the brand new Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5 a very close second. The new Goodyear only had one weakness, the rolling resistance testing, and was also reported to have a very high purchase price, which no longer applies in the UK market.
Third place was joint awarded to another new tyre, the Hankook Ventus S1 Evo 3. This continues on the excellent results Hankook has achieved with the new Ventus Prime 3 in 2018, and confirms what the market has suspected for a while - Hankook is now a premium player. The more established Falken FK510 matched the Hankook, with its only weakness being wear.
It's also worth noting that this is the first test the seventh place Nokian WetProof has been featured in. WetProof by name, the new Nokian proved to be extremely strong in the wet handling tests, but struggled during the aquaplaning testing.
Dry
If you average the dry braking and dry handling results, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 is the best dry weather tyre overall, with a huge gap during the dry braking testing. The Auto Bild testers also commented that the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 was the best handling tyre on test, giving excellent steering feel and precision.
Dry Braking
Spread: 2.90 M (8.5%)|Avg: 35.57 M
Dry braking in meters (Lower is better)
Dry Braking: Safety Impact: Best vs Worst Tyre
Dry Handling
Spread: 2.70 Km/H (2.3%)|Avg: 116.54 Km/H
Dry Handling Average Speed (Higher is better)
Pirelli P Zero
118.00 Km/H
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
117.70 Km/H
Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3
117.50 Km/H
Falken Azenis FK510
117.40 Km/H
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
117.10 Km/H
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2
117.00 Km/H
Fulda SportControl 2
116.90 Km/H
Sava Intensa UHP 2
116.80 Km/H
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
116.80 Km/H
Continental Premium Contact 6
116.40 Km/H
Toyo Proxes Sport
116.30 Km/H
Kumho Ecsta PS71
116.30 Km/H
Nokian WetProof
116.30 Km/H
Yokohama Advan Fleva V701
116.20 Km/H
Maxxis Premitra HP5
116.00 Km/H
Kenda Emera A1
115.80 Km/H
Apollo Aspire XP
115.70 Km/H
Bridgestone Turanza T005
115.60 Km/H
Kleber Dynaxer UHP
115.60 Km/H
Firestone RoadHawk
115.30 Km/H
Wet
The top four tyres during wet braking were all extremely close, with the new Hankook just beating the new Goodyear for the best wet braking tyre on test.
Wet Braking
Spread: 4.50 M (15.7%)|Avg: 30.87 M
Wet braking in meters (Lower is better)
Wet Braking: Safety Impact: Best vs Worst Tyre
The test-winning Michelin proved to be extremely strong during wet handling, leading the pack by a small margin.
Wet Handling
Spread: 4.90 Km/H (6.4%)|Avg: 73.65 Km/H
Wet Handling Average Speed (Higher is better)
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
76.50 Km/H
Nokian WetProof
75.90 Km/H
Pirelli P Zero
75.70 Km/H
Bridgestone Turanza T005
74.90 Km/H
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
74.70 Km/H
Kenda Emera A1
74.50 Km/H
Falken Azenis FK510
74.40 Km/H
Toyo Proxes Sport
74.00 Km/H
Apollo Aspire XP
73.80 Km/H
Continental Premium Contact 6
73.30 Km/H
Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3
73.20 Km/H
Kumho Ecsta PS71
73.20 Km/H
Fulda SportControl 2
73.00 Km/H
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
72.90 Km/H
Sava Intensa UHP 2
72.80 Km/H
Yokohama Advan Fleva V701
72.30 Km/H
Maxxis Premitra HP5
72.20 Km/H
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2
72.10 Km/H
Firestone RoadHawk
72.00 Km/H
Kleber Dynaxer UHP
71.60 Km/H
And somehow the Michelin tyre also dominated the straight aquaplaning testing, which is normally an opposing quality to tests like dry grip and handling.
Straight Aqua
Spread: 9.00 Km/H (9%)|Avg: 94.10 Km/H
Float Speed in Km/H (Higher is better)
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
99.70 Km/H
Toyo Proxes Sport
96.80 Km/H
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2
96.10 Km/H
Kenda Emera A1
95.70 Km/H
Falken Azenis FK510
95.60 Km/H
Kumho Ecsta PS71
95.50 Km/H
Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3
95.10 Km/H
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
95.00 Km/H
Sava Intensa UHP 2
94.90 Km/H
Apollo Aspire XP
94.60 Km/H
Maxxis Premitra HP5
94.50 Km/H
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
94.00 Km/H
Fulda SportControl 2
93.80 Km/H
Pirelli P Zero
92.30 Km/H
Yokohama Advan Fleva V701
92.20 Km/H
Continental Premium Contact 6
91.80 Km/H
Bridgestone Turanza T005
91.70 Km/H
Kleber Dynaxer UHP
91.10 Km/H
Nokian WetProof
90.80 Km/H
Firestone RoadHawk
90.70 Km/H
Environment
The Bridgestone Turanza T005 proved to have the lowest fuel use on test.
Rolling Resistance
Spread: 4.00 kg / t (53.4%)|Avg: 9.42 kg / t
Rolling resistance in kg t (Lower is better)
Bridgestone Turanza T005
7.49 kg / t
Firestone RoadHawk
7.69 kg / t
Continental Premium Contact 6
8.23 kg / t
Maxxis Premitra HP5
8.47 kg / t
Apollo Aspire XP
8.97 kg / t
Kleber Dynaxer UHP
8.99 kg / t
Yokohama Advan Fleva V701
9.08 kg / t
Fulda SportControl 2
9.09 kg / t
Sava Intensa UHP 2
9.22 kg / t
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2
9.43 kg / t
Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3
9.48 kg / t
Falken Azenis FK510
9.48 kg / t
Nokian WetProof
9.49 kg / t
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
9.61 kg / t
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
9.80 kg / t
Pirelli P Zero
10.27 kg / t
Kenda Emera A1
10.29 kg / t
Toyo Proxes Sport
10.67 kg / t
Kumho Ecsta PS71
11.06 kg / t
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
11.49 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.
All tyres, apart from the Bridgestone T005 were separated by less than 3dB during the external noise testing, with the new Nokian WetProof the quietest tyre on test.
Noise
Spread: 3.70 dB (5.2%)|Avg: 72.44 dB
External noise in dB (Lower is better)
Nokian WetProof
71.30 dB
Yokohama Advan Fleva V701
71.40 dB
Apollo Aspire XP
71.50 dB
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
71.60 dB
Falken Azenis FK510
71.70 dB
Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3
71.80 dB
Kleber Dynaxer UHP
71.80 dB
Fulda SportControl 2
71.90 dB
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2
72.20 dB
Kenda Emera A1
72.20 dB
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
72.30 dB
Sava Intensa UHP 2
72.60 dB
Continental Premium Contact 6
72.60 dB
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
72.60 dB
Toyo Proxes Sport
72.70 dB
Firestone RoadHawk
73.00 dB
Maxxis Premitra HP5
73.00 dB
Pirelli P Zero
73.50 dB
Kumho Ecsta PS71
74.10 dB
Bridgestone Turanza T005
75.00 dB
Each tyre was given a subjective comfort score, with the Michelin again being in a class of one.
Subj. Comfort
Spread: 7.00 Points (77.8%)|Avg: 6.20 Points
Subjective Comfort Score (Higher is better)
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
9.00 Points
Sava Intensa UHP 2
8.00 Points
Maxxis Premitra HP5
7.00 Points
Falken Azenis FK510
7.00 Points
Kleber Dynaxer UHP
7.00 Points
Continental Premium Contact 6
7.00 Points
Apollo Aspire XP
7.00 Points
Bridgestone Turanza T005
7.00 Points
Toyo Proxes Sport
7.00 Points
Kumho Ecsta PS71
7.00 Points
Fulda SportControl 2
6.00 Points
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
6.00 Points
Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3
6.00 Points
Pirelli P Zero
6.00 Points
Kenda Emera A1
5.00 Points
Firestone RoadHawk
5.00 Points
Yokohama Advan Fleva V701
5.00 Points
Nokian WetProof
5.00 Points
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
5.00 Points
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2
2.00 Points
Cost
The new Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5 beat Michelin at it's own game, having the lowest wear on test! Michelin and Continental were a close second and third place, which is great to see as wear has been a weak point for Continental in the past.
Wear
Spread: 27690.00 KM (51.1%)|Avg: 39316.00 KM
Predicted tread life in KM (Higher is better)
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
54210.00 KM
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
51090.00 KM
Continental Premium Contact 6
50700.00 KM
Sava Intensa UHP 2
44850.00 KM
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2
41730.00 KM
Bridgestone Turanza T005
41370.00 KM
Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3
41340.00 KM
Apollo Aspire XP
40560.00 KM
Falken Azenis FK510
39390.00 KM
Kleber Dynaxer UHP
39050.00 KM
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
38610.00 KM
Fulda SportControl 2
38220.00 KM
Nokian WetProof
37440.00 KM
Yokohama Advan Fleva V701
35880.00 KM
Pirelli P Zero
35880.00 KM
Firestone RoadHawk
35490.00 KM
Maxxis Premitra HP5
35490.00 KM
Toyo Proxes Sport
30420.00 KM
Kenda Emera A1
28080.00 KM
Kumho Ecsta PS71
26520.00 KM
The new Goodyear was the most expensive tyre tested, which would be to do with the new nature of the tyre. If you see our pricing below, the new Goodyear is already significantly cheaper than the Michelin in the UK.
Price
Spread: 230.00 (79.3%)|Avg: 374.00
Price in local currency (Lower is better)
Sava Intensa UHP 2
290.00
Maxxis Premitra HP5
300.00
Kenda Emera A1
310.00
Kumho Ecsta PS71
320.00
Fulda SportControl 2
335.00
Apollo Aspire XP
340.00
Falken Azenis FK510
345.00
Firestone RoadHawk
345.00
Vredestein Ultrac Vorti
360.00
Toyo Proxes Sport
360.00
Kleber Dynaxer UHP
370.00
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2
380.00
Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3
380.00
Nokian WetProof
385.00
Bridgestone Turanza T005
400.00
Continental Premium Contact 6
410.00
Yokohama Advan Fleva V701
410.00
Pirelli P Zero
440.00
Michelin Pilot Sport 4
480.00
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5
520.00
Most importantly, the "value" test, where the magazine divides the purchase price by the potential wear had the Continental and Falken as the best value tyres of the top six places! With the corrected Goodyear pricing, the new Asymmetric 5 also looks to be extremely good value.
Below are the overall results and testers commentary. Be sure to check out the full test on autobild.de, and feel free to leave any comments or questions below.
Driving exactly the Bridgestone Turanza T005 mentioned in the test. This was my first summer (right now my car has the 16" Dunlop Winter Sport 5 equipped). So long they have been very efficient (my Fiat has a 6.7 l/100km gasoline usage) compared to the Micheline Premacy 3 it's about 1.2l less every 100km and I manage to drive about 800km with a full tank, which used to be a lot less (~100km difference). The tyre is a bit noisy, but it's not relevant, I only hear the difference, while driving through a tunnel close to the wall and with my windows opened. For me with an FF car the wet performance is more relevant and this tyre gives me all I want. To explain it in short: while I'm driving a street car and not racing, I do not drive close to the limit on a dry surface, but when the road ahead is wet and the conditions change randomly, my cars limit is blurry, so I want a reliable tyre to drive on.
After one season the tyres are down to 5mm (front) and 6mm (rear), which is ok for a summer tyre.
"If you average the dry braking and dry handling results, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 is the best dry weather tyre overall, with a huge gap during the dry braking testing." Hmmm let me see, the best 34.2, the worst 37.1, that is about an 8% difference for dry braking for the two extremes, and no indication of error bars for accumulated different tests, or were they done once only ? Worse still, for dry handling, that is 115.3 worst versus 118.0 best, and is less than a 2.5% difference between so-called extremes. The graphs and conclusions are grossly misleading.
I have a set of the yokohama V701 Fleva's on my 2015 Golf GTD, Fantastic tire! if you ignorantly power everywhere... of course no grip but that will be the case with every tire! i find if i attack a corner properly and maintain load on the tires, they have tons and tons of grip. wet grip is a good, but obviously don't drive the car the same in the dry as you do in the wet. these tires are also very quiet and seem to be wearing very well at the moment, iv'e had mine on for 6 months now. Ill definitely be buying more of these tires!
After reading couple of articles about these tyres, it is a bit unclear to me whatever the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 are valid/approved tyres for a BMW F10 530xd 2014 model. Can anyone confirm this for me? Thanks.
As the PS4 came out after 2014 it's unlikely they will have specifically marque approved this tyre for that vehicle, however there's no reason you can't still fit them.
What is your experience with these test in terms - how applicable these would be to different wheel size/width or even load/speed index for tyre of the same model and make? Could you possibly make a video, or an article about the above + few more things? - load index - how would that translate in your view into handling/comfort (assuming you can have exactly the one car manufacturer requires for the vehicle model, or say way higher than needed index) - speed index - similar to above? How the construction of the tyre changes? is it heavier/better balanced etc? - thread width - this is something that is not mentioned anywhere, but the actuall thread width is influencing the contact patch with the ground.. yet, same width from different manufacturers differs for that, and it's not even same for different sized of the same tyre model!! so 235/45 can have different thread with than 235/35 and so on.. (the only site where I saw this measured was www.tirerack.com, but those are US market tyres, most differ to what we can get in europe...) - tyre pressure - what it can influence and how you can "balance" the car by changing the front/back pressure
Would really like to see something like that and learn more.
All good ideas, but the issue with this sort of test is what works for Tyre A in Size A won't really apply for other tyres of sizes. For example, some tyres in 91/97 load rating can be different, or some can be exactly the same tyre just with a different sidewall.
I will be doing a tyre pressure video, and I've done a tread width video, but that needs revisiting.
This page has nowhere written what it means by "comfort" if it is not a noise level. Fulda and Dunlop which I have have similar noise levels, but different comfort. What do you mean exactly by "comfort" ? Nothing explained. You should have a glossary of terms.
This is AutoBilds version of comfort, not mine. Subjective comfort scores generally mean how much road imperfection is transmitted through to the cabin.
I'm also surprised Maxxis didn't put the new VS5 (Victra Sport 5) in the test instead of the HP5 as that would be more comparible to the likes of the asymmetric 5 or the PS4 as a uhp tyre where as I was under the impression the HP5 was more like a primacy 4 or effecient grip touring style tyre. It's a shame as I want to see some test for that tyre as they are talking it up.
Good internal results or not, when they released the VS5 they described it as there flagship tyre. So you would think they would like to put that tyre in a test like this unless it fails to deliver as well as the HP5 which would be strange. The HP5 compares well with other touring tyres. If Maxxis are to go in the same direction as say Hankook for example and start becoming a more premium brand then they should use their most competitive tyres.
Glad to see my Sava Intensa 2 getting in the mid field of the test with a good rating overall. So far I have found them to be very good value for money after completing 8k miles so far on the front of my Seat Exeo with 225/40/18. I would have gone for the Fulda of the two Goodyear sub brands but can't find any garages that actually stock them in England. Only seem to be able to get them delivered whereas the Sava is stocked by one major UK chain.
I am currently looking for the best premium tyres to suit my needs for my 2015 Volvo V70 T5 (245HP front wheel drive) in the size 235/40 R18. My priorities are above all comfort (damping & noise), as well as fuel consumption. Nevertheless, the tyres should have the best possible grip on wet & dry roads to always have a safe feeling. Since I come from Germany, I sometimes drive at higher speeds, if possible ("German Auobahn").
Unfortunately the new Goodyear Eagle F1 Assymertic 5 are not yet available in size of 235/40R18. That's why I'm currently wavering between the previous GY Eagle F1 Assy3 and the Michelin Pilot Sport 4. Continental tyres are out of the question for personal reasons.
Both options are perfectly safe and very close in performances, but it seems the Asym 3 might have the slight edge if comfort and noise is your priority.
Hi again, the GY Eagle F1 Assy 5 would NOW be available in 235/40R18 as well! What is your early opinion - will it be as comfortable as the Assy3? Or should I take the predecessor at the moment to be on the safe side?
Thank you for your very fast and helpful reply!! So would you basically recommend the Assy 5 in comparison to the 3 for now? Did you find any noticeable drawbacks in your tests?
Kumho Ecsta PS71 225/45 r17 comes in the 94Y XL version or 91Y without reinforcement? Because there is a major difference between the two variants. 94Y XL has A Brake and C fuel consumption, and 91Y has A brake and E fuel consumption! The 245/45 r18 XL also comes in A/C and B/C. So it's interesting to consider this aspect.
I stated that, too. Auto bild says what version they used at their site. Most of the tires were 91Y but there where 94s and Ws. Khumos were the 91Y version. Maybe the differences in label scores are because of different margins according to category.
Auto Bild also do classic tyre tests (almost uniquely). Would it be possible to include your standard test report style summaries of them on TR's menu? (The 2018 test was interesting in showing how relatively well a poor modern tyre, the Maxxis MAP-I, did in comparison to a suite of classic tyres.)
The 2018 one was in issue #6 with tyre size 205/70-14. If you decide to doit, then a backlog of past tests (4 years of?) all at once is my advice. Whilst I'm in suggestion mode, then please revisit summarising tests from the Australian mags Wheels, Motor & Which Car (all one stable).
Thanks for posting this review. I'm considering the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 (245/40 R18) but noise and comfort are a top priority for me. Would I be better off with a premium touring tyre instead of a high-performance one?
In that sense it seems surprising that the Continental Premium Contact 6 is not better rated for noise and comfort. What about something like the Michelin Primacy 3, would that fare better than the PS4 in terms of noise and comfort?
The issue with noise testing is this test is external noise, which is different from external noise.
This compounds with the fact every car and tyre combination behave a little differently, you shouldn't use one test to made your choice. I'd suggest finding similar cars to yours, or at least the same wheel and tyre size and seeing which tyres are rated highly
I'm quite surprised, as I have read many reports of people complaining about the poor comfort of the PS4 and giving positive feedback on comfort after switching to various equivalents.
Thanks for the great article, once again. I was wondering: we see a lot of summer (dry) tests and winter (snow/ice) tests, but even though the summer tests always include wet braking distances, etc, we never really see a test focused on rain/wet conditions.
Where I live we never get snow or Ice, so what I would like to use is a set of UUHP tyres for the summer (considering mainly semi slicks) and the best possible tyres in the wet for the winter. So even though Michelin Pilot Sport 4 got great results in the wet, I can't help but think there must be a better set of tyres for wet conditions... After all, they're made mainly for dry handling.
Nope, PS4 is pretty much it. It sounds like you're thinking about a rain specific tyre as they use in racing, an ultra soft compound, but as we don't have the luxury of changing tyres just for when it rains, and they have to work in the dry, they don't really exist. Uniroyal RainSport 3 used to be the rain tyre, but it's been best now. Maybe wait for the RainSport 4 ;)
Yeah, RainSport would be the kind of tyre I was thinking about. Or Nokian WetProof, featured in this test... I was baffled to see them being best by PS4 on both wet categories(!), however in the "Positive" section of the Nokian, we can read "Wet specialist with the best wet cornering, precise steering, short wet and dry braking distances, low noise." so I was a little confused by that. For an imaginary always-wet winter (hi London!), would you still go for the PS4?
Depending on the vehicle and what you wanted from the tyre, the PS4 is great. If it's not a sporty car, something more touring orientated like the RainProof is also a good option, or anything inbetween!
The tyre wear depends on many parameters, including the vehicle used for the test. in fact, the kinematics of the suspension/load/tire pressures have a big influence on tyre wear (+driving style). So it's difficult to get an objective answer on forums, that's why these tyre tests are very useful with only one car/driver etc. It's even more interesting if the review is done with several tyre sizes. By the way, the Michelin looks excellent and I can't wait to purchase them !
Michelin usually lead the way with wear, so the reports of low mileage on the PS4 was more a surprise than this to me. As Ben says, wear depends on many factors, but these highly controlled tests are usually the best market indicator.
I'm curious how the mag estimates tyre life? Surely they don't run each tyre on identical cars on the road for the life of each tyre? Or do they run for a set period, measure tread depth compared to when new, then calculate likely life?
Exactly that, which is why it's so expensive and so few people do it. They usually run convoys on the road for 15,000 miles rotating the drivers and position of cars in the convoy and then extrapolate the total wear from the starting and remaining tread depth.
How on the Earth the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 is the best in comfort?!
I always find is very comfortable for its class.
Driving exactly the Bridgestone Turanza T005 mentioned in the test. This was my first summer (right now my car has the 16" Dunlop Winter Sport 5 equipped).
So long they have been very efficient (my Fiat has a 6.7 l/100km gasoline usage) compared to the Micheline Premacy 3 it's about 1.2l less every 100km and I manage to drive about 800km with a full tank, which used to be a lot less (~100km difference).
The tyre is a bit noisy, but it's not relevant, I only hear the difference, while driving through a tunnel close to the wall and with my windows opened.
For me with an FF car the wet performance is more relevant and this tyre gives me all I want.
To explain it in short: while I'm driving a street car and not racing, I do not drive close to the limit on a dry surface, but when the road ahead is wet and the conditions change randomly, my cars limit is blurry, so I want a reliable tyre to drive on.
After one season the tyres are down to 5mm (front) and 6mm (rear), which is ok for a summer tyre.
Great information, feel free to put it on the site here :) https://www.tyrereviews.co....
"If you average the dry braking and dry handling results, the Michelin
Pilot Sport 4 is the best dry weather tyre overall, with a huge gap
during the dry braking testing."
Hmmm let me see, the best 34.2, the worst 37.1, that is about an 8% difference for dry braking for the two extremes, and no indication of error bars for accumulated different tests, or were they done once only ? Worse still, for dry handling, that is 115.3 worst versus 118.0 best, and is less than a 2.5% difference between so-called extremes. The graphs and conclusions are grossly misleading.
For dry braking as a test, 8% is huge. It's usually a very close test.
I have a set of the yokohama V701 Fleva's on my 2015 Golf GTD, Fantastic tire! if you ignorantly power everywhere... of course no grip but that will be the case with every tire! i find if i attack a corner properly and maintain load on the tires, they have tons and tons of grip. wet grip is a good, but obviously don't drive the car the same in the dry as you do in the wet. these tires are also very quiet and seem to be wearing very well at the moment, iv'e had mine on for 6 months now.
Ill definitely be buying more of these tires!
After reading couple of articles about these tyres, it is a bit unclear to me whatever the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 are valid/approved tyres for a BMW F10 530xd 2014 model.
Can anyone confirm this for me?
Thanks.
As the PS4 came out after 2014 it's unlikely they will have specifically marque approved this tyre for that vehicle, however there's no reason you can't still fit them.
What is your experience with these test in terms - how applicable these would be to different wheel size/width or even load/speed index for tyre of the same model and make?
Could you possibly make a video, or an article about the above + few more things?
- load index - how would that translate in your view into handling/comfort (assuming you can have exactly the one car manufacturer requires for the vehicle model, or say way higher than needed index)
- speed index - similar to above? How the construction of the tyre changes? is it heavier/better balanced etc?
- thread width - this is something that is not mentioned anywhere, but the actuall thread width is influencing the contact patch with the ground.. yet, same width from different manufacturers differs for that, and it's not even same for different sized of the same tyre model!! so 235/45 can have different thread with than 235/35 and so on.. (the only site where I saw this measured was www.tirerack.com, but those are US market tyres, most differ to what we can get in europe...)
- tyre pressure - what it can influence and how you can "balance" the car by changing the front/back pressure
Would really like to see something like that and learn more.
Thanks, appreciate the great work you are doing!
All good ideas, but the issue with this sort of test is what works for Tyre A in Size A won't really apply for other tyres of sizes. For example, some tyres in 91/97 load rating can be different, or some can be exactly the same tyre just with a different sidewall.
I will be doing a tyre pressure video, and I've done a tread width video, but that needs revisiting.
This page has nowhere written what it means by "comfort" if it is not a noise level.
Fulda and Dunlop which I have have similar noise levels, but different comfort. What do you mean exactly by "comfort" ? Nothing explained. You should have a glossary of terms.
This is AutoBilds version of comfort, not mine. Subjective comfort scores generally mean how much road imperfection is transmitted through to the cabin.
https://www.autobild.de/art...
I'm also surprised Maxxis didn't put the new VS5 (Victra Sport 5) in the test instead of the HP5 as that would be more comparible to the likes of the asymmetric 5 or the PS4 as a uhp tyre where as I was under the impression the HP5 was more like a primacy 4 or effecient grip touring style tyre. It's a shame as I want to see some test for that tyre as they are talking it up.
Maxxis are really pushing the HP5 at the moment thanks to some excellent internal test results.
Good internal results or not, when they released the VS5 they described it as there flagship tyre. So you would think they would like to put that tyre in a test like this unless it fails to deliver as well as the HP5 which would be strange. The HP5 compares well with other touring tyres. If Maxxis are to go in the same direction as say Hankook for example and start becoming a more premium brand then they should use their most competitive tyres.
Glad to see my Sava Intensa 2 getting in the mid field of the test with a good rating overall. So far I have found them to be very good value for money after completing 8k miles so far on the front of my Seat Exeo with 225/40/18. I would have gone for the Fulda of the two Goodyear sub brands but can't find any garages that actually stock them in England. Only seem to be able to get them delivered whereas the Sava is stocked by one major UK chain.
Both brands are difficult to find in the UK!
Hello,
I am currently looking for the best premium tyres to suit my needs for my 2015 Volvo V70 T5 (245HP front wheel drive) in the size 235/40 R18. My priorities are above all comfort (damping & noise), as well as fuel consumption. Nevertheless, the tyres should have the best possible grip on wet & dry roads to always have a safe feeling. Since I come from Germany, I sometimes drive at higher speeds, if possible ("German Auobahn").
Unfortunately the new Goodyear Eagle F1 Assymertic 5 are not yet available in size of 235/40R18. That's why I'm currently wavering between the previous GY Eagle F1 Assy3 and the Michelin Pilot Sport 4. Continental tyres are out of the question for personal reasons.
What recommondation would you give me?
Both options are perfectly safe and very close in performances, but it seems the Asym 3 might have the slight edge if comfort and noise is your priority.
Thank you very much for the quick feedback!
So you think that the relatively old Assy 3 can still compete with the PS4?
With regards to comfort and noise, yes. It might be a few % behind in other areas, there should be data on the site
Hi again,
the GY Eagle F1 Assy 5 would NOW be available in 235/40R18 as well!
What is your early opinion - will it be as comfortable as the Assy3?
Or should I take the predecessor at the moment to be on the safe side?
Having just tested the 5 compared to the 3, I can tell you it's a more comfortable tyre
Thank you for your very fast and helpful reply!!
So would you basically recommend the Assy 5 in comparison to the 3 for now?
Did you find any noticeable drawbacks in your tests?
Now I just ordered the Assy5. I'm looking forward to testing them on my car!
Thanks for all the help. :-)
Let me know how you get on :)
Kumho Ecsta PS71 225/45 r17 comes in the 94Y XL version or 91Y without reinforcement? Because there is a major difference between the two variants. 94Y XL has A Brake and C fuel consumption, and 91Y has A brake and E fuel consumption!
The 245/45 r18 XL also comes in A/C and B/C. So it's interesting to consider this aspect.
I stated that, too. Auto bild says what version they used at their site. Most of the tires were 91Y but there where 94s and Ws. Khumos were the 91Y version. Maybe the differences in label scores are because of different margins according to category.
Auto Bild also do classic tyre tests (almost uniquely). Would it be possible to include your standard test report style summaries of them on TR's menu? (The 2018 test was interesting in showing how relatively well a poor modern tyre, the Maxxis MAP-I, did in comparison to a suite of classic tyres.)
I've not seen these classic tyre tests, but would certainly summarise them if I had a copy of the article. I'll look into it!
The 2018 one was in issue #6 with tyre size 205/70-14. If you decide to doit, then a backlog of past tests (4 years of?) all at once is my advice.
Whilst I'm in suggestion mode, then please revisit summarising tests from the Australian mags Wheels, Motor & Which Car (all one stable).
Any joy on this yet?
I'll try and pick this up this year if I see any!
Thanks. The merit (for you) of you hunting is that it is a new element for the site.
Thanks for posting this review. I'm considering the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 (245/40 R18) but noise and comfort are a top priority for me. Would I be better off with a premium touring tyre instead of a high-performance one?
In that sense it seems surprising that the Continental Premium Contact 6 is not better rated for noise and comfort. What about something like the Michelin Primacy 3, would that fare better than the PS4 in terms of noise and comfort?
The issue with noise testing is this test is external noise, which is different from external noise.
This compounds with the fact every car and tyre combination behave a little differently, you shouldn't use one test to made your choice. I'd suggest finding similar cars to yours, or at least the same wheel and tyre size and seeing which tyres are rated highly
I'm quite surprised, as I have read many reports of people complaining about the poor comfort of the PS4 and giving positive feedback on comfort after switching to various equivalents.
Thanks for the great article, once again. I was wondering: we see a lot of summer (dry) tests and winter (snow/ice) tests, but even though the summer tests always include wet braking distances, etc, we never really see a test focused on rain/wet conditions.
Where I live we never get snow or Ice, so what I would like to use is a set of UUHP tyres for the summer (considering mainly semi slicks) and the best possible tyres in the wet for the winter. So even though Michelin Pilot Sport 4 got great results in the wet, I can't help but think there must be a better set of tyres for wet conditions... After all, they're made mainly for dry handling.
Any advice?
Nope, PS4 is pretty much it. It sounds like you're thinking about a rain specific tyre as they use in racing, an ultra soft compound, but as we don't have the luxury of changing tyres just for when it rains, and they have to work in the dry, they don't really exist. Uniroyal RainSport 3 used to be the rain tyre, but it's been best now. Maybe wait for the RainSport 4 ;)
Yeah, RainSport would be the kind of tyre I was thinking about. Or Nokian WetProof, featured in this test... I was baffled to see them being best by PS4 on both wet categories(!), however in the "Positive" section of the Nokian, we can read "Wet specialist with the best wet cornering, precise steering, short wet and dry braking distances, low noise." so I was a little confused by that. For an imaginary always-wet winter (hi London!), would you still go for the PS4?
Thanks a lot for your reply, by the way!
Depending on the vehicle and what you wanted from the tyre, the PS4 is great. If it's not a sporty car, something more touring orientated like the RainProof is also a good option, or anything inbetween!
Alright thanks for everything! Will probably go for the PS4 ;)
I'm surprised with the good wear results of the Michelin Pilot Sport 4.
I've always considered its purchase but was discouraged by several comments in forums about its very quick wear.
Maybe the wear varies depending on size and/or load and speed rate?
The tyre wear depends on many parameters, including the vehicle used for the test. in fact, the kinematics of the suspension/load/tire pressures have a big influence on tyre wear (+driving style).
So it's difficult to get an objective answer on forums, that's why these tyre tests are very useful with only one car/driver etc. It's even more interesting if the review is done with several tyre sizes.
By the way, the Michelin looks excellent and I can't wait to purchase them !
PS4 are great. Michelin is best option for summer tyre.
Michelin usually lead the way with wear, so the reports of low mileage on the PS4 was more a surprise than this to me. As Ben says, wear depends on many factors, but these highly controlled tests are usually the best market indicator.
I'm curious how the mag estimates tyre life? Surely they don't run each tyre on identical cars on the road for the life of each tyre? Or do they run for a set period, measure tread depth compared to when new, then calculate likely life?
Exactly that, which is why it's so expensive and so few people do it. They usually run convoys on the road for 15,000 miles rotating the drivers and position of cars in the convoy and then extrapolate the total wear from the starting and remaining tread depth.