Menu

2023 Sport Auto UHP 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 Km/H % Braking M Handling Km/H Circle m/s Straight Aqua Km/H Curved Aquaplaning m/sec2 % Noise dB % Price Rolling Resistance kg / t %
1 Continental SportContact 7 96.9% 33.7 101.8 100% 24.1 2 87.5 2 8.58 2 80.1 3.37 97.8% 73.3 95.1% 112 8.2 2 82.8%
2 Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 96.8% 33.8 2 100.6 99.3% 23.8 86.4 8.52 79.1 3.38 97.5% 70.9 3 98.3% 103 8.3 3 84.2%
3 ▲1 Firestone Firehawk Sport 96.6% 34.5 100.7 3 98.3% 24.3 3 86.2 8.48 79.4 3.19 96.3% 71.3 97.8% 112 7.1 91.8%
4 ▲5 Maxxis Victra Sport 5 95.7% 34.4 100.1 98.2% 24.4 85.8 8.49 79.8 3.19 96.1% 71.3 97.8% 89 2 9 84%
5 ▲2 Falken Azenis FK520 95.2% 35.2 100.6 97.3% 24.5 83.1 8.3 80.6 3.47 95.6% 71.3 97.8% 96 3 8.6 84.2%
6 ▲4 Giti GitiSportS2 95% 35.4 100.4 96.9% 24.8 84.4 8.46 80.6 3.63 96.7% 71.1 98% 110 8.9 78.7%
7 ▲1 Kumho Ecsta PS91 94.9% 34.4 100 98.1% 25.2 84.8 8.38 79.4 3.52 3 95.6% 69.7 100% 103 9.5 77%
8 ▼2 Bridgestone Potenza Sport 94.8% 35.2 101.1 2 97.5% 25.4 88.7 8.81 79.3 3.38 97.4% 71.6 97.4% 114 10.2 71%
9 ▲2 Nexen N Fera Sport SU2 94.5% 35.1 99 96.6% 24.6 83.5 8.28 79.2 3.09 94.2% 70.2 2 99.3% 84 8.9 86.5%
10 ▼7 Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S 94.5% 33.9 3 100.6 99.1% 24.5 84.6 8.46 80.6 3.63 97% 72.1 96.7% 181 9.6 64.9%
11 ▼6 Pirelli P Zero PZ4 94.5% 34.1 100.5 98.8% 26.6 86.7 3 8.57 3 79.9 3.4 95.2% 71.1 98% 111 9.6 74.5%
Scroll for more
Dry 100% Wet 98% Comfort 95% Value 83%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 33.7 M
Dry Handling 101.8 Km/H
Wet
Wet Braking 24.1 M 2
Wet Handling 87.5 Km/H 2
Wet Circle 8.58 m/s 2
Straight Aqua 80.1 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 3.37 m/sec2
Comfort
Noise 73.3 dB
Value
Price 112
Rolling Resistance 8.2 kg / t 2
Dry 99% Wet 98% Comfort 98% Value 84%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 33.8 M 2
Dry Handling 100.6 Km/H
Wet
Wet Braking 23.8 M
Wet Handling 86.4 Km/H
Wet Circle 8.52 m/s
Straight Aqua 79.1 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 3.38 m/sec2
Comfort
Noise 70.9 dB 3
Value
Price 103
Rolling Resistance 8.3 kg / t 3
Dry 98% Wet 96% Comfort 98% Value 92%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 34.5 M
Dry Handling 100.7 Km/H 3
Wet
Wet Braking 24.3 M 3
Wet Handling 86.2 Km/H
Wet Circle 8.48 m/s
Straight Aqua 79.4 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 3.19 m/sec2
Comfort
Noise 71.3 dB
Value
Price 112
Rolling Resistance 7.1 kg / t
4
95.7%
Dry 98% Wet 96% Comfort 98% Value 84%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 34.4 M
Dry Handling 100.1 Km/H
Wet
Wet Braking 24.4 M
Wet Handling 85.8 Km/H
Wet Circle 8.49 m/s
Straight Aqua 79.8 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 3.19 m/sec2
Comfort
Noise 71.3 dB
Value
Price 89 2
Rolling Resistance 9 kg / t
5
95.2%
Dry 97% Wet 96% Comfort 98% Value 84%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 35.2 M
Dry Handling 100.6 Km/H
Wet
Wet Braking 24.5 M
Wet Handling 83.1 Km/H
Wet Circle 8.3 m/s
Straight Aqua 80.6 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 3.47 m/sec2
Comfort
Noise 71.3 dB
Value
Price 96 3
Rolling Resistance 8.6 kg / t
6
95%
Dry 97% Wet 97% Comfort 98% Value 79%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 35.4 M
Dry Handling 100.4 Km/H
Wet
Wet Braking 24.8 M
Wet Handling 84.4 Km/H
Wet Circle 8.46 m/s
Straight Aqua 80.6 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 3.63 m/sec2
Comfort
Noise 71.1 dB
Value
Price 110
Rolling Resistance 8.9 kg / t
7
94.9%
Dry 98% Wet 96% Comfort 100% Value 77%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 34.4 M
Dry Handling 100 Km/H
Wet
Wet Braking 25.2 M
Wet Handling 84.8 Km/H
Wet Circle 8.38 m/s
Straight Aqua 79.4 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 3.52 m/sec2 3
Comfort
Noise 69.7 dB
Value
Price 103
Rolling Resistance 9.5 kg / t
Dry 98% Wet 97% Comfort 97% Value 71%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 35.2 M
Dry Handling 101.1 Km/H 2
Wet
Wet Braking 25.4 M
Wet Handling 88.7 Km/H
Wet Circle 8.81 m/s
Straight Aqua 79.3 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 3.38 m/sec2
Comfort
Noise 71.6 dB
Value
Price 114
Rolling Resistance 10.2 kg / t
9
94.5%
Dry 97% Wet 94% Comfort 99% Value 87%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 35.1 M
Dry Handling 99 Km/H
Wet
Wet Braking 24.6 M
Wet Handling 83.5 Km/H
Wet Circle 8.28 m/s
Straight Aqua 79.2 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 3.09 m/sec2
Comfort
Noise 70.2 dB 2
Value
Price 84
Rolling Resistance 8.9 kg / t
10
94.5%
Dry 99% Wet 97% Comfort 97% Value 65%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 33.9 M 3
Dry Handling 100.6 Km/H
Wet
Wet Braking 24.5 M
Wet Handling 84.6 Km/H
Wet Circle 8.46 m/s
Straight Aqua 80.6 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 3.63 m/sec2
Comfort
Noise 72.1 dB
Value
Price 181
Rolling Resistance 9.6 kg / t
11
94.5%
Dry 99% Wet 95% Comfort 98% Value 75%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 34.1 M
Dry Handling 100.5 Km/H
Wet
Wet Braking 26.6 M
Wet Handling 86.7 Km/H 3
Wet Circle 8.57 m/s 3
Straight Aqua 79.9 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 3.4 m/sec2
Comfort
Noise 71.1 dB
Value
Price 111
Rolling Resistance 9.6 kg / t
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.

Discussion

15 comments
  1. Saeed Piroozfard archived

    Hey guys, I wanna buy tyres for my crossover (255/45/R20) and have three options:

    Nexen nfera Supreme (N5000 Platinum) : $175 each,
    Nankang SP-9 Cross-Sport : $115,
    Giti Sport S2 SUV :$125

    which will provide more comfort on the road since the roads here are so bumpy

    #9266
  2. Ayoub Saber archived

    Will you recommend SportContact 7 over bmw PS4 S* ? Which one will last longer and have better feedback?

    #9042
    1. TyreReviews Ayoub Saber archived

      Difficult to say as there's a few versions of the PS4S*. Unless it's a G series car I would probably go for SC7.

      #9043
      1. Ayoub Saber TyreReviews archived

        It's my second set of SC7 right now, they are great though they become sharper after 50% of wear.. and the wear is really pretty fast** that's why I said maybe PS4S* will last longer and will be sharper right after the fitment no need to wait haha

        **3000km/1900miles, no track, some canyon cruising only - results: ~80% wear front and 50% rear. TTS mk2.

        #9044
        1. TyreReviews Ayoub Saber archived

          Holy smoke that's fast wear. Maybe the PS4S are worth a shot! What size you running?

          #9048
  3. TassieLorenzo archived

    I wonder if the Potenza Sport has a progressively stiffer sidewall as the rim diameter increases (or profile decreases) compared to the Potenza RE004 or the predecessor Potenza S007A (with the RE004 and S007A being seemingly fairly similar, and similar in construction to the RE003 too)?

    205/55 R16
    Potenza Sport 8.6kg (-1.1kg)
    Potenza RE004 9.7kg
    (Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 / Potenza RE003 9.5kg)

    225/45 R17
    Potenza Sport 9.7kg (-0.7kg)
    Potenza S007A 10.4kg
    (Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 / Potenza RE003 10.4kg)

    225/40 R18
    Firestone Firehawk Sport 9.44kg (-1kg)
    Potenza Sport 10.3kg (-0.1kg)
    (Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 / Potenza RE003 10.4kg)

    235/35 R19
    Potenza Sport 9.9kg (-0.9kg)
    (Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 / Potenza RE003 10.8kg)

    [Unfortunately Tirerack no longer list the weights for sizes of the S007A that are now sold out and no longer available, which is most sizes!]

    It would be great to get some of these old school Japanese-style Bridgestone Potenzas (i.e., where the road tyres are built almost like a track tyre) into a Tyre Reviews tyre test, though it might not be necessary if the Potenza Sport still uses the stiff construction in the bigger rim diameters. :)

    That would explain why the 18" Potenza Sport is excellent, but I'm not too happy with the 17" Potenza Sport -- their immense grip *would be* superb, if only not for the slightly soft sidewalls and slight floatiness/vagueness compared to RE003 and subsequently S007A which I used before (granted nowhere near as bad as something like a 17" Pilot Sport 4 ST) -- so I'll be changing them out for Potenza RE004.

    Though judging by the lighter weight nature of the 19" version, maybe that's not the case, so I dunno.

    It seems like this European-market Firehawk Sport is a more comfort or rolling resistance biased version of the Potenza Sport? So not really an equivalent to the RE003-based Indy 500 model for hot hatchbacks, small sportscars and the like (I'm assuming there will eventually be a Firehawk Indy 500 Mk2 based on the Potenza RE004).

    #8785
    1. TyreReviews TassieLorenzo archived

      I'm afraid I can't answer your questions at the moment, but the Bridgestone Potenza S02 was one of the all time great tyres and built like a brick!

      #8789
      1. TassieLorenzo TyreReviews archived

        I found some new old stock S007A to put back on the car and it feels so much better IMO, so much more keyed in to the road (even if the grip is less). I had the chance to compare the unmounted S007A to unmounted Sports in 17", and there was quite a big difference -- the S007A were pretty much rock-solid whereas the Sports were about the same as the Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6s in your 17" tyre test (somewhat firmish but some definite squish too, lol, definitely much more flexible by about 30-40%). :)

        The plot thickens -- I saw a Japanese tyre review with 0323-dated S007A tyres, so I went on the Bridgestone Japan website where the locally-made Potenza S007A is still listed a current model (and indeed the Potenza Sport that would be an import, is not listed). So it turns out it still being made in Japan after all, so maybe there will be a S008 or Sport 2 that combines the best of both tyres one day? :)

        https://tire.bridgestone.co...

        #8816
        1. TyreReviews TassieLorenzo archived

          Sadly all modern tyres are taking strength out of the sidewall in order to hit rolling resistance targets. The rock hard tyres are from yesteryear :(

          #8823
  4. Jonathan archived

    In the video it is stated by auto zeitung that between each wet braking test run they had to drive around the test facility for the next run during which the tires cooled down again. The Potenza Sport and P Zero seem to need some temperature because they were performing much better in the "roundabout track" for wet cornering grip.

    #8769
    1. TyreReviews Jonathan archived

      This lines up with my and others experiences. In one test the Potenza Sport got shorter in wet braking every time we did it which is very unusual, I noted it in the video. Real world reviews have noted on cold wet days it's very difficult.

      #8776
  5. Dan archived

    And again Goodyear produced the best quality/price tyre. EF1A6 all the way!

    #8749
    1. TyreReviews Dan archived

      Really impressive tyre.

      #8755
  6. Asier archived

    Is it possible that the thread for the Conti was just 5,8 mm?
    I need new tyres for A4 on 19”. Considering you tested both of them, which one from Sportcontact 7 and Asymmetric 6 would you choose based on how they isolate the road roughness? It’s a rather important quality for me.

    Thanks for your help!

    #8739
    1. TyreReviews Asier archived

      I asked Conti and they said it should be 7.2mm.

      I've not compared your two options back to back but I believe the Goodyear should be more comfortable.

      #8742