This year’s summer tire test focused on safety, grip, and predictability in a range of real-world conditions. Seven models were put through dry and wet tests to evaluate their braking, handling, hydroplaning resistance, and overall behavior. Six came from well-established manufacturers — one was a budget option at a third of the price. The differences were not just on paper.
Wet Performance
Stopping distance in the wet showed clear gaps between premium and budget options. The best models stopped well under 30 meters from 80 km/h, with strong initial grip and linear deceleration. At the other end, one tire crossed the 32-meter mark — a major liability when seconds matter.
Aquaplaning resistance followed a similar pattern. Goodyear led the group with outstanding lateral stability in deep water, maintaining grip longer than expected in both straight and curved conditions. Pirelli and Michelin weren’t far behind, delivering a composed feel even as water levels increased. Continental offered strong consistency, though its grip dropped more abruptly when pushed beyond the limit.
Wet Braking
- Continental
- Pirelli
- Goodyear
- Michelin
- Hankook
- Firestone
- Austone
Info! Wet braking in meters (80-10 km/h).
Wet Circle
- Pirelli
- Goodyear
- Continental
- Firestone
- Michelin
- Hankook
- Austone
Info! Lap time.
Firestone and Hankook performed safely but left less margin for correction under pressure. Hankook in particular showed early rear-end instability during off-throttle cornering — manageable, but noticeable. The budget tire, by contrast, felt vague and unpredictable. It broke traction early and without warning, forcing constant corrections and long recovery times.
Lap times in the wet confirmed the subjective impressions. The top three tires stayed composed throughout complex corner sequences, with minimal steering adjustment needed. The worst performer drifted off-line repeatedly, often requiring mid-corner braking just to stay within track limits — something no road driver should have to manage in the rain.
Straight Hydroplaning
- Goodyear
- Firestone
- Michelin
- Hankook
- Pirelli
- Continental
- Austone
Info! Float speed, (km/h).
Lateral Hydroplaning
- Goodyear
- Michelin
- Pirelli
- Continental
- Firestone
- Hankook
- Austone
Info! Float speed, (km/h).
Dry Performance
On dry asphalt, Continental delivered the shortest braking distance, with Goodyear and Pirelli just behind. All three inspired confidence in emergency stops, with minimal front-end dive and excellent directional stability.
Cornering on dry surfaces separated the responsive from the vague. Pirelli offered the cleanest feedback, allowing fast transitions and crisp mid-corner adjustments. Goodyear leaned into a sportier feel, with precise turn-in and high lateral grip — even if it traded some ride comfort. Michelin was more relaxed, prioritizing smooth reactions and predictable breakaway over agility.
Dry Braking
- Continental
- Pirelli
- Goodyear
- Firestone
- Michelin
- Hankook
- Austone
Info! Dry braking in meters (80-10 km/h).
Firestone delivered decent grip but lacked sharpness during initial steering input. Hankook was balanced, if a little soft. The budget option again disappointed: slow to react, requiring large steering corrections, and never truly locking into a line.
Noise & Rolling Resistance
While not a deciding factor in performance, rolling resistance and noise matter for daily driving. Michelin and Goodyear offered the quietest ride, making them stand out in terms of comfort. Pirelli and Firestone also struck a good balance, avoiding intrusive noise without dulling the feel of the road.
Noise
- Michelin
- Goodyear
- Pirelli
- Continental
- Firestone
- Hankook
- Austone
Info! External noise level in dB.
Rolling Resistance
- Firestone
- Michelin
- Pirelli
- Hankook
- Continental
- Austone
- Goodyear
Info! Rolling resistance in kg/t.
In terms of efficiency, Firestone posted the lowest rolling resistance, followed by Michelin and Pirelli. Goodyear and Continental were on the higher end — a tradeoff for their sharper dynamic performance. Once again, the budget tire underperformed, combining high resistance with loud road roar, particularly over coarse surfaces.
Conclusion – Choose Control, Not Just Grip
Top-tier tires didn’t just post the shortest stops — they delivered control across every test. Whether in dry corners or standing water, they provided the feedback and predictability needed to stay ahead of the limit. The performance gap wasn’t just numerical; it was felt in every maneuver.
One tire stood out as the most complete — combining safety, composure, and response. Others were close, favoring either comfort or sportiness. But the budget model simply wasn’t in the same league. It lacked the precision, stability, and grip required for confident driving, especially in the wet.
Don’t let price be the only factor. Tires are the final link between driver and road. And when conditions change fast, that link needs to hold.
Results
1st Place: Pirelli / Cinturato C3
Quick Take
Pirelli Cinturato C3
Pirelli delivered the most balanced performance in this test — combining strong grip on both wet and dry surfaces with responsive steering and predictable reactions. In the wet, it resisted hydroplaning longer than most and kept the car composed in sweeping curves. On dry roads, it offered precise direction changes without compromising comfort. Noise levels were modest, and rolling resistance stayed competitive. A complete package for confident driving with no major trade-offs.
2nd Place: Goodyear / Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
Quick Take
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
Goodyear stood out for its lateral grip in wet curves, maintaining control where others began to float. It also impressed on dry tarmac, with agile turn-in and fast cornering response. Noise was minimal, though it came at the cost of higher rolling resistance — making it slightly less efficient for long-distance use. Ideal for drivers who prefer performance driving feel without harshness.
3rd Place: Continental / PremiumContact 7
Quick Take
Continental PremiumContact 7
Continental led the field in braking performance, both on dry pavement and in wet emergencies. The tire offered strong front-end bite and consistent deceleration under pressure. While hydroplaning resistance was good, reactions were slightly more abrupt than the top two — and its efficiency trailed them as well. Still, for drivers who prioritize stopping power and control, it’s a safe, confidence-inspiring choice.
4th Place: Michelin / Primacy 5
Quick Take
Michelin Primacy 5
Michelin emphasized comfort and composure. It remained quiet and smooth over varied surfaces, while maintaining respectable grip in both wet and dry settings. Handling wasn’t as quick as top-tier rivals, and lateral control during wet transitions was a touch looser. But for everyday driving and long hauls, it struck an excellent balance between ride refinement and safety.
5th Place: Firestone / Roadhawk 2 Enliten
Quick Take
Firestone Roadhawk 2 Enliten
Firestone delivered consistent results across the board, with no glaring weaknesses. It maintained stability under braking and cornering, and posted the lowest rolling resistance in the group — making it the most efficient tire tested. Steering feedback was muted, especially in sharp changes of direction, but the overall package was safe and predictable.
6th Place: Hankook / Ventus Prime 4 K135
Quick Take
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135
Hankook showed decent overall grip and neutral behavior, but lagged behind in edge scenarios. Wet handling was less precise, with the rear stepping out early in corners. Braking was stable, if a bit long, and the tire remained quiet on rougher roads. It performed best when driven moderately and stayed predictable under light loads.
7th Place: Austone / Athena SP-303
Quick Take
Austone Athena SP-303
As the least expensive tire on test, Austone also delivered the weakest results. Wet braking distances were the longest by far, and hydroplaning occurred earlier than with any competitor. In corners, both wet and dry, the tire lacked feedback and took time to respond to inputs — forcing corrections and reducing confidence. While noise levels were acceptable, performance gaps in key safety areas were too wide to ignore.
