Menu

2019 Auto Zeitung Summer Tyre Test

Jonathan Benson
Data analyzed and reviewed by Jonathan Benson
6 min read Updated

Adjust Result Weighting

The overall scores below are calculated using our weighting system. Since the original publication may use a different scoring methodology that wasn't shared, these results may differ from their published rankings. You can adjust the weightings below to explore how different priorities affect the results.
Dry 35%
Wet 50%
Comfort 5%
Value 10%
Dry 35% · Wet 50% · Comfort 5% · Value 10%
Fine-tune sub-categories
Dry
Wet
Comfort
Value

Test Results Data

BEST Good Average Below Average
# Tyre Total Score Dry Wet Comfort Value
Braking M Handling s % Braking M Handling s Straight Aqua Km/H % Noise dB % Price Rolling Resistance kg / t %
1 Continental Premium Contact 6 95.9% 36 ★ 59.3 ★ 100% 57.7 2 90 ★ 74 97.5% 71 95.8% 555 8.34 73.6%
2 ▲1 Maxxis Premitra HP5 95.8% 36.4 2 60.2 3 98.7% 59.2 91.2 2 73.2 95.8% 68 ★ 100% 345 3 8.31 83.4%
3 ▼1 Michelin Primacy 4 94.3% 36.6 3 59.7 2 98.8% 60.6 94.2 72.3 93.4% 71 95.8% 590 7.2 ★ 81.8%
4 ▲2 Yokohama BluEarth AE50 94.1% 37.8 60.4 96.7% 59 93.4 70.8 94.4% 70 3 97.1% 470 7.68 3 81.4%
5 ▼1 Pirelli CINTURATO P7 93.7% 37.5 60.2 3 97.3% 58.8 3 96.6 74.2 3 94.1% 70 3 97.1% 465 8.19 77.7%
6 ▲1 Michelin CrossClimate Plus 93.7% 39.2 60.4 95% 54.6 ★ 96 70.4 96.3% 72 94.4% 645 7.78 75.6%
7 ▼2 Bridgestone Turanza T005 92.7% 36.8 60.7 97.8% 66.6 92.8 3 74.3 2 91.2% 71 95.8% 540 7.46 2 80.9%
8 Apollo Aspire XP 92.5% 37.4 60.3 97.3% 65.8 94 74.1 91% 70 3 97.1% 400 8.16 81%
9 Kumho Ecsta HS51 89.5% 39.2 60.7 94.8% 73.1 98 75.1 ★ 86.3% 70 3 97.1% 325 2 8.49 83.7%
10 Nankang AS1 87.9% 39.2 60.9 94.6% 77.3 99.9 68.2 82.2% 69 2 98.6% 265 ★ 8.92 87.1%
Scroll for more
1
Continental Premium Contact 6
95.9%
Dry 100% Wet 98% Comfort 96% Value 74%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 36 M ★
Dry Handling 59.3 s ★
Wet
Wet Braking 57.7 M 2
Wet Handling 90 s ★
Straight Aqua 74 Km/H
Comfort
Noise 71 dB
Value
Price 555
Rolling Resistance 8.34 kg / t
More information
2
Maxxis Premitra HP5 ▲1
95.8%
Dry 99% Wet 96% Comfort 100% Value 83%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 36.4 M 2
Dry Handling 60.2 s 3
Wet
Wet Braking 59.2 M
Wet Handling 91.2 s 2
Straight Aqua 73.2 Km/H
Comfort
Noise 68 dB ★
Value
Price 345 3
Rolling Resistance 8.31 kg / t
More information
3
Michelin Primacy 4 ▼1
94.3%
Dry 99% Wet 93% Comfort 96% Value 82%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 36.6 M 3
Dry Handling 59.7 s 2
Wet
Wet Braking 60.6 M
Wet Handling 94.2 s
Straight Aqua 72.3 Km/H
Comfort
Noise 71 dB
Value
Price 590
Rolling Resistance 7.2 kg / t ★
More information
4
Yokohama BluEarth AE50 ▲2
94.1%
Dry 97% Wet 94% Comfort 97% Value 81%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 37.8 M
Dry Handling 60.4 s
Wet
Wet Braking 59 M
Wet Handling 93.4 s
Straight Aqua 70.8 Km/H
Comfort
Noise 70 dB 3
Value
Price 470
Rolling Resistance 7.68 kg / t 3
More information
5
Pirelli CINTURATO P7 ▼1
93.7%
Dry 97% Wet 94% Comfort 97% Value 78%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 37.5 M
Dry Handling 60.2 s 3
Wet
Wet Braking 58.8 M 3
Wet Handling 96.6 s
Straight Aqua 74.2 Km/H 3
Comfort
Noise 70 dB 3
Value
Price 465
Rolling Resistance 8.19 kg / t
More information
6
Michelin CrossClimate Plus ▲1
93.7%
Dry 95% Wet 96% Comfort 94% Value 76%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 39.2 M
Dry Handling 60.4 s
Wet
Wet Braking 54.6 M ★
Wet Handling 96 s
Straight Aqua 70.4 Km/H
Comfort
Noise 72 dB
Value
Price 645
Rolling Resistance 7.78 kg / t
More information
7
Bridgestone Turanza T005 ▼2
92.7%
Dry 98% Wet 91% Comfort 96% Value 81%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 36.8 M
Dry Handling 60.7 s
Wet
Wet Braking 66.6 M
Wet Handling 92.8 s 3
Straight Aqua 74.3 Km/H 2
Comfort
Noise 71 dB
Value
Price 540
Rolling Resistance 7.46 kg / t 2
More information
8
Apollo Aspire XP
92.5%
Dry 97% Wet 91% Comfort 97% Value 81%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 37.4 M
Dry Handling 60.3 s
Wet
Wet Braking 65.8 M
Wet Handling 94 s
Straight Aqua 74.1 Km/H
Comfort
Noise 70 dB 3
Value
Price 400
Rolling Resistance 8.16 kg / t
More information
9
Kumho Ecsta HS51
89.5%
Dry 95% Wet 86% Comfort 97% Value 84%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 39.2 M
Dry Handling 60.7 s
Wet
Wet Braking 73.1 M
Wet Handling 98 s
Straight Aqua 75.1 Km/H ★
Comfort
Noise 70 dB 3
Value
Price 325 2
Rolling Resistance 8.49 kg / t
More information
10
Nankang AS1
87.9%
Dry 95% Wet 82% Comfort 99% Value 87%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 39.2 M
Dry Handling 60.9 s
Wet
Wet Braking 77.3 M
Wet Handling 99.9 s
Straight Aqua 68.2 Km/H
Comfort
Noise 69 dB 2
Value
Price 265 ★
Rolling Resistance 8.92 kg / t
More information
Not every driver has the same priorities. Adjust the category weightings above to re-rank the tyres based on what matters most to your driving style.
Scores are colour-coded from red (weakest) through yellow to green (strongest) to help you quickly spot each tyre's strengths and weaknesses.
The original test ranking is shown in the # column. Arrows indicate how each tyre moves when your custom weighting is applied.

Similar Tyre Tests

Show All summer tyre tests
2026 autozurnal Eco Summer Tyre Test
April 2026 215/55 R18 Hankook iON Evo 10 tyres
2026 Motor Summer Tyre Test
April 2026 225/45 R17 Continental PremiumContact 7 9 tyres
2026 AutoBild Track Day Tyre Test
April 2026 275/35 R19 Pirelli P Zero Trofeo RS 7 tyres
2026 Summer ECO Tyre Test
March 2026 195/55 R16 Dunlop Blue Response TG 8 tyres
2026 Sport Auto Summer Tyre Test
March 2026 205/45 R17 Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo 7 tyres
2026 Vi Bilagare Summer Tyre Test
March 2026 205/55 R16 Continental PremiumContact 7 10 tyres

Discussion

25 comments
  1. Lux archived

    I would like a very quiet tyres and safety as well.
    My doubt is michelin primacy 4 or nokian wetproof. Size 225/45/17 for a Bmw 1 series.
    I understood that Nokian are better on wet and dry as well, and noise is approximately the same. But when they are much aged, will they maintain the same characteristics? thanks for helping!

    #4638
    1. TyreReviews Lux archived

      As a rule Michelin generally wear better than other brands, but the Nokian is a new tyre from a premium brand so there's no reason this should perform worse than any other brand.

      #4640
      1. Lux TyreReviews archived

        Thanks for your reply... In terms of noisy goodyear asymmetric 5 are better?

        #4642
        1. TyreReviews Lux archived

          Have a look at our video and the various test data on this site :)

          #4651
          1. Lux TyreReviews archived

            Already did ?. But I am confused. ...constructors declare a noise value but in test it is different. For instance goodyear f1 a3 68db and in your test f1 a5(70db) are quieter. Could you please advise me the quieter tyres(premium brands) at high speeds(motorway).
            I will appreciate very mutch! Thanks?

            #4653
            1. TyreReviews Lux archived

              You have all the data I have :) My noise test was internal noise, some tests are external.

              #4654
  2. Justin Saunders archived

    I would have liked to see Landsail tyres in the list. Appreciate there are many makes now
    though.

    #4424
  3. Lulu Bulu archived

    I think that load and speed index should be known. They make a difference even in the same size and model. Correct me if I'm wrong.

    #4403
    1. TyreReviews Lulu Bulu archived

      They don't always made a difference, but you're right, it can. I'll work on getting it added to the database where available!

      #4407
  4. J archived

    I have those Maxxis Premitra HP5, at first I liked them, but not anymore..
    At a certain point, where there's approx 5-5,5mm of thread left, they change a lot, like it's a whole different rubber compound. Suddenly they're terrible sub 5deg Celsius. Also their wet capabilities have become poor. When it's wet and sub 5C they're lethal. They've become extremely noisy over time.
    Wear is high in the beginning, but now it's really slow.

    #4396
    1. J J archived

      Also, how can the Premitra HP5 be 'new' (as mentioned in the text) if I have them already since February 2017.. DOT = 4616..
      Or did they have an update?

      #4398
        1. TyreReviews Jtp archived

          New with tyres is relative, though you're right, I thought they were launched in early 2018 but I was wrong.

          Obviously I can't comment on grip, but that's very good wear for 40,000 kms!

          #4402
    2. TyreReviews J archived

      Interesting information, hopefully it's a one off or weather related but I'll keep an eye out for other reviews like this. ADAC did wear test a Maxxis tyre and found nothing usual, though it was a different pattern.

      #4399
    3. giannis karadimos J archived

      For 5 years and 45000km I had the Pirelli Pzero Nero(205/45/16) and I was very satisfied with this tire. Now I'm thinking of putting the premitra hp5,but i am not sure if this should be a good choice. It can compare this tire with my old pirelli? Is Maxxis premitra a worth buying in your opinion?

      #4451
  5. Jirka Chomat archived

    Hi, I can't find it on the Autozeitung website as mentioned, can you give me a hint?

    #4395
    1. TyreReviews Jirka Chomat archived

      It might not be published yet, sorry! I'll update the article with a link when it is.

      #4397
  6. Andy Holmes archived

    Nice clear layout for this one!
    The surprise was the Kumho which usually tests pretty well and has strong reviews to back this up. Like the other Andy just said though, like the CC, this is more a 'general' tyre stretched out to a more 'sporty' size against some more 'sportier' tyres.
    That said, the second surprise is the Maxxis, also a 'general' tyre, testing a bit better than normal. They arent poor tyres, but its a strong result nevertheless. The big downside of these astronomic wear, but that is the downfall of a lot of decent tyres today!

    #4394
    1. TyreReviews Andy Holmes archived

      I've just added even more data points to the overall results, should make things even clearer (though the formatting does need updating!)

      #4400
  7. Engineer_Andy archived

    A couple of points, one that TR needs to include on the review details, the other, more a commentary over Auto Zeitung's methodology:

    1. The size/rating of the tyres tested is not mentioned in the details or title of the review (the size for the ADAC review is). Given the CC+ is more suited to 'standard' (non-performance/low profile) tyre sized to get the best performance (from reading previous reviews [and why I chose them for my car]), what size of tyre tested could easily sway the result as regards how the CC+ fairs.

    2. The test (at least as the results are shown here) don't show any marks for wear/value for money, which other tests often do. As many group tests have already shown, the CC+ is excellent on that score and more than offset the higher purchase price, especially when the winter performance is factored in. Similarly no marks were given for 'comfort', another rating that the CC+ often does very well on.

    It's a shame (you're not at fault Jon, but the magazines testing them) that there isn't a more unified testing regime as what criteria are used - I have no problems with performance tyres (obviously not the CC+ or other all-season tyres) being weighted more to the handling/braking side of things, but I think all reviews and group tests should include comparative scores across a wide range of aspects of the tyre, as some can look overly good or poor because a rating is included, excluded or weighted too heavily.

    #4392
    1. TyreReviews Engineer_Andy archived

      Hi Andy!

      The size was in the database, I just forgot to mention it in the article. First of the year, I'm rusty :) It's added now!

      As I'm sure you know, wear is very difficult to test, as to do it properly you actually have to go out and drive. For 10 sets of tyres, which need at least 10,000 miles on, that's a lot of driving. I'm always thankful when ADAC and Auto Bild do include wear testing.

      I'm in the process of adding the score weighting details to the database too so hopefully that will become more clear in the future. It's currently difficult to decide whether to use the raw data where available, or to use the scoring numbers magazines also feel the need to apply.

      #4393
      1. Engineer_Andy TyreReviews archived

        No problem Jon. I had an inkling that the tyre size in the group test was a lower profile one, as from the reviews generally the CC+ seems to do less well in wider, lower profile sizes than those over 50. I'm keen on a group test with it against other all-season and summer tyres for the two most popular sizes: 205/55 R16 and 195/65 R15.

        #4404
        1. TyreReviews Engineer_Andy archived

          I'm sure it's featured in those in the past? The data must be on the website (I'm on mobile so can't search right now)

          #4416
    2. 4cvg Engineer_Andy archived

      In my judgement, it's a good thing that various magazines use different test protocols & weight different parameters of performance differently & differently for different classes of tyre.
      An astute user of tests should be ignoring overall scores anyway & mining the data for information on parameters of interest. A variety of test protocol "takes" on those prioritised areas adds breadth.
      What should ideally be as apparent as possible is information about the test protocol which led to a given score & TR tries to supply this to some extent in the introductory "blurb" & in table annotations.

      #4432