Menu

2025 EV Tyre Test

Jonathan Benson
Data analyzed and reviewed by Jonathan Benson
7 min read
Below are all the data points for the 2025 EV Tyre Test, displaying how each tyre performed across all test categories. The spider chart below provides a complete overview of performance, where one hundred percent represents the best performance in each category. The larger the area covered by each tyre's plot, the better its overall performance.
How to read these charts: For each test category, data is presented relative to the best performing tire. The direction indicates whether lower or higher values are better - pay close attention to this when interpreting results.

Performance Overview

This radar chart shows relative performance across all test categories, with 100% representing the best performance in each category. Reference tires may have gaps where data is not available.

Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
Goodride Solmax 1
Continental PremiumContact 7
Falken e.Ziex
Hankook iON Evo
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

Quick Navigation

Dry Performance Overview

Dry Braking (M)

Spread: 4.20 M (12.5%) | Avg: 35.73 M

Dry braking in meters (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Hankook iON Evo with a result of 33.6 M. The difference between best and worst was 11.1%.
  1. Hankook iON Evo
    33.6 M
  2. Continental PremiumContact 7
    34.5 M
  3. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    35.1 M
  4. Falken e.Ziex
    35.7 M
  5. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    35.9 M
  6. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    36.6 M
  7. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    36.6 M
  8. Goodride Solmax 1
    37.8 M

Dry Handling (Km/H)

Spread: 4.60 Km/H (5%) | Avg: 90.74 Km/H

Dry Handling Average Speed (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Hankook iON Evo with a result of 92.8 Km/H. The difference between best and worst was 5%.
  1. Hankook iON Evo
    92.8 Km/H
  2. Continental PremiumContact 7
    91.9 Km/H
  3. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    91.1 Km/H
  4. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    90.8 Km/H
  5. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    90.5 Km/H
  6. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    90.4 Km/H
  7. Falken e.Ziex
    90.2 Km/H
  8. Goodride Solmax 1
    88.2 Km/H

Wet Performance Overview

Wet Braking (M)

Spread: 9.30 M (23.6%) | Avg: 43.18 M

Wet braking in meters (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Continental PremiumContact 7 with a result of 39.4 M. The difference between best and worst was 19.1%.
  1. Continental PremiumContact 7
    39.4 M
  2. Hankook iON Evo
    39.6 M
  3. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    41.8 M
  4. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    42.2 M
  5. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    43.2 M
  6. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    44.9 M
  7. Falken e.Ziex
    45.6 M
  8. Goodride Solmax 1
    48.7 M

Wet Handling (Km/H)

Spread: 6.00 Km/H (8.1%) | Avg: 71.65 Km/H

Wet Handling Average Speed (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Hankook iON Evo with a result of 74.4 Km/H. The difference between best and worst was 8.1%.
  1. Hankook iON Evo
    74.4 Km/H
  2. Continental PremiumContact 7
    74.1 Km/H
  3. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    72.9 Km/H
  4. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    72 Km/H
  5. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    71.5 Km/H
  6. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    70.6 Km/H
  7. Falken e.Ziex
    69.3 Km/H
  8. Goodride Solmax 1
    68.4 Km/H

Wet Circle (s)

Spread: 0.58 s (4.7%) | Avg: 12.72 s

Wet Circle Lap Time in seconds (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Hankook iON Evo with a result of 12.45 s. The difference between best and worst was 4.5%.
  1. Hankook iON Evo
    12.45 s
  2. Continental PremiumContact 7
    12.59 s
  3. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    12.67 s
  4. Falken e.Ziex
    12.68 s
  5. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    12.7 s
  6. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    12.79 s
  7. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    12.86 s
  8. Goodride Solmax 1
    13.03 s

Straight Aqua (Km/H)

Spread: 16.40 Km/H (20.5%) | Avg: 70.66 Km/H

Float Speed in Km/H (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN with a result of 80.1 Km/H. The difference between best and worst was 20.5%.
  1. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    80.1 Km/H
  2. Hankook iON Evo
    74.8 Km/H
  3. Falken e.Ziex
    72.6 Km/H
  4. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    71.5 Km/H
  5. Continental PremiumContact 7
    69.3 Km/H
  6. Goodride Solmax 1
    67.5 Km/H
  7. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    65.8 Km/H
  8. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    63.7 Km/H

Curved Aquaplaning (m/sec2)

Spread: 0.44 m/sec2 (14.6%) | Avg: 2.81 m/sec2

Remaining lateral acceleration (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN with a result of 3.02 m/sec2. The difference between best and worst was 14.6%.
  1. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    3.02 m/sec2
  2. Hankook iON Evo
    2.97 m/sec2
  3. Goodride Solmax 1
    2.85 m/sec2
  4. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    2.84 m/sec2
  5. Falken e.Ziex
    2.84 m/sec2
  6. Continental PremiumContact 7
    2.74 m/sec2
  7. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    2.6 m/sec2
  8. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    2.58 m/sec2

Comfort Performance Overview

Subj. Comfort ( Points)

Spread: 3.00 Points (37.5%) | Avg: 6.75 Points

Subjective Comfort Score (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV with a result of 8 Points. The difference between best and worst was 37.5%.
  1. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    8 Points
  2. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    7 Points
  3. Continental PremiumContact 7
    7 Points
  4. Falken e.Ziex
    7 Points
  5. Hankook iON Evo
    7 Points
  6. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    7 Points
  7. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    6 Points
  8. Goodride Solmax 1
    5 Points

Noise (dB)

Spread: 3.40 dB (4.9%) | Avg: 70.66 dB

External noise in dB (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61 with a result of 68.7 dB. The difference between best and worst was 4.7%.
  1. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    68.7 dB
  2. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    69.9 dB
  3. Hankook iON Evo
    70.2 dB
  4. Goodride Solmax 1
    70.3 dB
  5. Falken e.Ziex
    70.9 dB
  6. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    71.2 dB
  7. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    72 dB
  8. Continental PremiumContact 7
    72.1 dB

Value Performance Overview

Wear (KM)

Spread: 20540.00 KM (41.9%) | Avg: 38073.75 KM

Predicted tread life in KM (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV with a result of 49050 KM. The difference between best and worst was 41.9%.
  1. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    49050 KM
  2. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    44920 KM
  3. Hankook iON Evo
    43120 KM
  4. Continental PremiumContact 7
    40890 KM
  5. Falken e.Ziex
    36790 KM
  6. Goodride Solmax 1
    31030 KM
  7. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    30280 KM
  8. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    28510 KM

Value (Price/1000)

Spread: 5.40 Price/1000 (49.1%) | Avg: 14.49 Price/1000

Euros/1000km based on cost/wear (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodride Solmax 1 with a result of 11 Price/1000. The difference between best and worst was 32.9%.
  1. Goodride Solmax 1
    11 Price/1000
  2. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    12 Price/1000
  3. Falken e.Ziex
    14.9 Price/1000
  4. Hankook iON Evo
    15.1 Price/1000
  5. Continental PremiumContact 7
    15.2 Price/1000
  6. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    15.6 Price/1000
  7. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    15.7 Price/1000
  8. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    16.4 Price/1000

Rolling Resistance (kg / t)

Spread: 1.80 kg / t (30.7%) | Avg: 7.02 kg / t

Rolling resistance in kg t (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Falken e.Ziex with a result of 5.86 kg / t. The difference between best and worst was 23.5%.
  1. Falken e.Ziex
    5.86 kg / t
  2. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    6.51 kg / t
  3. Hankook iON Evo
    6.81 kg / t
  4. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    7.15 kg / t
  5. Goodride Solmax 1
    7.22 kg / t
  6. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    7.33 kg / t
  7. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    7.58 kg / t
  8. Continental PremiumContact 7
    7.66 kg / t

Range (km)

Spread: 65.60 km (16%) | Avg: 373.11 km

Calculated Range (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Falken e.Ziex with a result of 410 km. The difference between best and worst was 16%.
  1. Falken e.Ziex
    410 km
  2. Hankook iON Evo
    381.3 km
  3. Michelin Primacy 4 Plus
    377.2 km
  4. Goodride Solmax 1
    373.2 km
  5. Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
    373.1 km
  6. Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61
    373.1 km
  7. Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN
    352.6 km
  8. Continental PremiumContact 7
    344.4 km

Overall Findings

Based on the weighted scoring from all tests, here are the overall results:

Position Tyre Score
Hankook iON Evo 0%
2 Continental PremiumContact 7 0%
3 Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV 0%
4 Michelin Primacy 4 Plus 0%
5 Falken e.Ziex 0%
6 Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN 0%
7 Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61 0%
8 Goodride Solmax 1 0%

Discussion

10 comments
  1. Phillip Jenkins archived

    These are great tests and the results are very helpful. However, I have a 2020 Tesla Model Y that have 255/40R20 so it's harder or impossible to find in your test fleet. In my location of Minneapolis it's VERY common to have dedicated snows (mine are Sottozero 3) and a good All Season for the rest of the year. It turns out finding a good 3+ seasons tire in my size is not easy. I must walk thru a whole series of trade-offs to get a few remaining features I can live with. I can find a summer tire with does well dry & wet & handling & braking. But replacing that soft rubber every 25K miles? I managed nearly 30K miles out of the original Eagle F1 that came with my Model Y (they've changed that now) only because I have experience driving a 4200 pound over-powered car before. It's not the weight its the heavy foot. Taking the highway cloverleaf ramp at 55 mph when it's 90 degrees F means you rub off 1000 hwy miles in 15 seconds. Anyway, some tire testing with my tire size requirements would be immensely helpful. You do great testing! Thank you for that work.

    #10086
    1. Sebastien Phillip Jenkins archived

      I am in Canada and Hankook has the winter version of the iON. It's called the ION icept

      #10247
  2. Benjamin Hojnik archived

    That's a lot of difference a tire can make on the range! Is there any data on this publication at what sort of speed range tests were performed?

    #10049
    1. James Benjamin Hojnik archived

      This is a great question! From what I understand, the impact of tires on range is much smaller at highway speeds. So if this test was run at highway speeds, you might see as much as 2x this impact at slower speeds, versus if this test was done at lower speeds, the impact could be as little as 1/2 of this at highway speeds

      #10451
      1. TyreReviews James archived

        I believe Autobild usually run the tyres on an oval around 80kmh but I would need to check.

        A tyres impact remains relatively constant but you are correct that the aero factor squares so at higher speeds the air is a bigger issue.

        #10452
  3. Pedro Neves archived

    Shouldn´t the range scale be the other way around? I believe the Falken should have a 100% grade and be the 1st and the Continental 84%, being the 8th.

    #10032
        1. TyreReviews Pedro Neves archived

          Yes you are correct, nice spot. Let me fix that.

          #10037