Home » Summer

Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2: The Definitive Test Analysis

Reading 6 min Modified by
It's one of the most durable and economical tires on the market. However, our analysis of 15+ tests reveals this is achieved through compromises in some key safety areas.

Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 photo, test, review, ratings

Contents
  1. Tire Summary
  2. Key Performance
  3. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 vs. Competitors
  4. Analytical Review
  5. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 Test History
  6. Comparison vs Market

Tire Summary

Category Details
General This is a Premium Touring Summer tire with an asymmetrical tread pattern. It was released in 2020 and is suitable for Passenger cars and city crossovers.

The tire replaced the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance.
Testing History

3.9

Average
place

1

Best
place

9

Worst
place

16

times
tested

2020-2025

test
years
✅ Key Strengths
  • Class-leading durability & Noise: Ranks #1 in projected mileage (outlasting rivals by over 5,000 km) and is one of the quietest tires available.
  • Secure handling: Demonstrates competent, safe cornering in both wet and dry conditions, placing it in the top tier.
  • Excellent efficiency: Ranked top 3 in rolling resistance, combined with its exceptional lifespan, makes it highly cost-effective.
⚠️ Compromises
  • Braking performance: Ranks near the bottom of its class in braking, requiring significantly more distance to stop on both dry (+1.2m) and wet (+2.5m) surfaces compared to leaders.
  • Mixed aquaplaning resistance. Excellent results in lateral, but only average on straights.
Comparison vs Market Above median: Wear resistance (+25.46%), Rolling resistance (+8.54%), Noise (+1.14%).
Below median: Dry braking (-0.34%), Straight aquaplaning (-0.69%)*.
Comparison vs key competitors
  • vs. Conti PC7: Goodyear offers superior mileage, comfort, and economy; Continental excels in another area, particularly braking power.
  • vs. Primacy 4+: Goodyear leads in wear and quietness; Michelin has a distinct advantage in dry braking.
  • vs. Cinturato P7 C2: Goodyear is more durable and comfortable; Pirelli delivers substantially shorter braking distances.
Value Good high for high-mileage drivers. The combination of exceptional durability and fuel efficiency provides outstanding long-term value, offsetting a higher initial purchase price.
Conclusion The ideal choice for the practical, high-mileage driver who prioritizes long-term value and comfort, especially for motorway journeys. However, it is not the optimal choice for those seeking maximum braking power, where alternatives from Continental or Pirelli are superior.

Key Performance

Overall rating: 96.5% (123 measurements from 16 independent tests)
ⓘ The overall rating is calculated as the arithmetic average of the average scores for each discipline, to eliminate bias towards disciplines with a large number of tests.

Dry Performance

  • Dry braking

    (2.5/5)
    Average
    Based on 16 tests|0 wins|Avg. pos. 7.4th|2-17th range|Rating: 95.5%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 1 (6%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 10 (63%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    • Weak: 5 (31%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    Detailed Test Results: 16 tests analyzed (2020-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 40% of competitors per test
    • ➖ No first-place finishes
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 1 of 16
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 13 of 16
    • ⚠️ Worst-3 finishes: 2 of 16
    • ✅ No last-place finishes
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:14.8 m (2020 Autonavigator)
    • Worst result:38.3 m (2024 Auto Bild R17)
    • Average result:34.5 m
    • Typical gap to leader:+1.02 – +1.85 m
    • Max gap to leader:+2.1 m (2023 Motor)

  • Dry handling

    (4.5/5)
    Exemplary
    Based on 14 tests|1 wins|Avg. pos. 4.4th|1-16th range|Rating: 99.1%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 8 (57%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 5 (36%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    • Weak: 1 (7%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    Detailed Test Results: 14 tests analyzed (2020-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 73.6% of competitors per test
    • 🏆 Victories (1st place): 1 of 14
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 7 of 14
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 1 of 14
    • ✅ No worst-3 finishes
    • ✅ No last-place finishes

Wet Performance

  • Wet braking

    (2.5/5)
    Average
    Based on 16 tests|0 wins|Avg. pos. 6.8th|2-16th range|Rating: 92.3%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 3 (19%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 9 (56%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    • Weak: 4 (25%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    Detailed Test Results: 16 tests analyzed (2020-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 45.8% of competitors per test
    • ➖ No first-place finishes
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 2 of 16
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 10 of 16
    • ⚠️ Worst-3 finishes: 3 of 16
    • ❌ Last-place finish: 1 of 16
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:15.6 m (2020 Autonavigator)
    • Worst result:59.6 m (2023 Motor)
    • Average result:38.8 m
    • Typical gap to leader:+1.35 – +3.7 m
    • Max gap to leader:+8.5 m (2023 Motor)

  • Wet handling

    (4/5)
    Good
    Based on 16 tests|1 wins|Avg. pos. 5.3th|1-16th range|Rating: 98.6%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 8 (50%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 6 (38%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    • Weak: 2 (13%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    Detailed Test Results: 16 tests analyzed (2020-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 62.5% of competitors per test
    • 🏆 Victories (1st place): 1 of 16
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 6 of 16
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 6 of 16
    • ✅ No worst-3 finishes
    • ✅ No last-place finishes

  • Wet lateral handling

    (4.5/5)
    Exemplary
    Based on 5 tests|0 wins|Avg. pos. 3th|2-5th range|Rating: 97.7%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 2 (40%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 3 (60%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    Detailed Test Results: 5 tests analyzed (2021-2022)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 79% of competitors per test
    • ➖ No first-place finishes
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 3 of 5
    • ✅ No bottom-half finishes
    • ✅ No worst-3 finishes
    • ✅ No last-place finishes

Aquaplaning resistance

  • Straight aqua

    (2.5/5)
    Average
    Based on 15 tests|0 wins|Avg. pos. 8.5th|3-18th range|Rating: 94.6%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 2 (13%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 6 (40%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    • Weak: 7 (47%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    Detailed Test Results: 15 tests analyzed (2020-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 35.1% of competitors per test
    • ➖ No first-place finishes
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 2 of 15
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 13 of 15
    • ⚠️ Worst-3 finishes: 5 of 15
    • ✅ No last-place finishes
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:91.5 km/h (2024 Auto Bild R17)
    • Worst result:73 km/h (2020 Teknikens Varld)
    • Average result:79.1 km/h
    • Typical gap to leader:-5.8 – -2.4 km/h
    • Max gap to leader:-13.14 km/h (2020 Tyre Reviews)

  • Lateral aqua

    (3.5/5)
    Good
    Based on 9 tests|1 wins|Avg. pos. 4.7th|1-14th range|Rating: 95.1%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 4 (44%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 3 (33%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    • Weak: 2 (22%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    Detailed Test Results: 9 tests analyzed (2020-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 65.7% of competitors per test
    • 🏆 Victories (1st place): 1 of 9
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 4 of 9
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 3 of 9
    • ✅ No worst-3 finishes
    • ✅ No last-place finishes

Secondary

  • Rolling resistance

    (4.5/5)
    Exemplary
    Based on 16 tests|1 wins|Avg. pos. 2.9th|1-5th range|Rating: 92.7%
    Performance Chart
    • Exemplary: 2 (13%) i Outstanding result, significantly better than the test average.
    • Good: 10 (63%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 4 (25%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    Detailed Test Results: 16 tests analyzed (2020-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 78.6% of competitors per test
    • 🏆 Victories (1st place): 1 of 16
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 11 of 16
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 1 of 16
    • ✅ No worst-3 finishes
    • ✅ No last-place finishes
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:0.5503 kg/t (2020 Teknikens Varld)
    • Worst result:35.3 kg/t (2020 Autonavigator)
    • Average result:8 kg/t
    • Typical gap to leader:+0.09 – +0.76 kg/t
    • Max gap to leader:-3 kg/t (2020 Autonavigator)

  • Noise

    (4.5/5)
    Exemplary
    Based on 13 tests|5 wins|Avg. pos. 3.5th|1-10th range|Rating: 99.3%
    Performance Chart
    • Exemplary: 2 (15%) i Outstanding result, significantly better than the test average.
    • Good: 6 (46%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 5 (38%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    Detailed Test Results: 13 tests analyzed (2020-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 79.7% of competitors per test
    • 🏆 Victories (1st place): 5 of 13
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 8 of 13
    • ✅ No bottom-half finishes
    • ✅ No worst-3 finishes
    • ✅ No last-place finishes
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:60.6 dB (2020 Autonavigator)
    • Worst result:72.3 dB (2024 Auto Bild)
    • Average result:67.4 dB
    • Typical gap to leader:+0.3 – +1.2 dB
    • Max gap to leader:+2 dB (2021 Auto Bild)

  • Wear resistance

    (5/5)
    Elite
    Based on 3 tests|3 wins|Avg. pos. 1th|1-1th range|Rating: 100%
    Performance Chart
    • Exemplary: 2 (67%) i Outstanding result, significantly better than the test average.
    Detailed Test Results: 3 tests analyzed (2021-2024)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 100% of competitors per test
    • 🏆 Victories (1st place): 3 of 3
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 3 of 3
    • ✅ No bottom-half finishes
    • ✅ No worst-3 finishes
    • ✅ No last-place finishes
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:51340km (2022 Auto Bild)
    • Worst result:45250km (2024 Auto Bild)
    • Average result:48176.7km
    • Max gap to leader:0km ()

Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 vs. Competitors

Compared to top competitors, Goodyear excels in comfort and wear resistance, performing well in both dry and wet conditions. Overall, it’s a competitive choice.

Key Statistics

  • ⚠️ Dry braking #9 of 10
  • ✅ Dry handling #3 of 10
  • ⚠️ Wet braking #6 of 10
  • ✅ Wet handling #5 of 10
  • ✅ Wet lateral handling #3 of 9
  • ⚠️ Straight aqua #6 of 10
  • ✅ Lateral aqua #3 of 9
  • ✅ Noise #2 of 10
  • ✅ Rolling resistance #3 of 10
  • 🏆 Wear resistance #1 of 10
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Continental PremiumContact 7 3.5%
99.03%
3.5%
-1.23 m
2
Nokian WetProof 2.8%
98.29%
2.8%
-0.97 m
3
Pirelli Cinturato P7 (P7C2) 2.7%
98.23%
2.7%
-0.95 m
4
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135 1.9%
97.44%
1.9%
-0.67 m
5
Michelin Primacy 4+ 1.3%
96.84%
1.3%
-0.46 m
6
Toyo Proxes Comfort 1.2%
96.69%
1.2%
-0.41 m
7
Vredestein Ultrac 1.2%
96.68%
1.2%
-0.41 m
8
Dunlop Sport BluResponse 0.2%
95.73%
0.2%
-0.08 m
9
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
95.52%
—
—
10
Bridgestone Turanza 6 1.5%
94.06%
1.5%
+0.51 m
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Continental PremiumContact 7 0.5%
99.64%
0.5%
+0.61 km/h
2
Nokian WetProof 0.0%
99.17%
0.0%
+0.04 km/h
3
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
99.13%
—
—
4
Toyo Proxes Comfort 0.2%
98.90%
0.2%
-0.28 km/h
5
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135 0.3%
98.83%
0.3%
-0.37 km/h
6
Pirelli Cinturato P7 (P7C2) 0.4%
98.76%
0.4%
-0.45 km/h
7
Vredestein Ultrac 0.4%
98.75%
0.4%
-0.46 km/h
8
Michelin Primacy 4+ 0.4%
98.69%
0.4%
-0.54 km/h
9
Bridgestone Turanza 6 0.5%
98.59%
0.5%
-0.65 km/h
10
Dunlop Sport BluResponse 0.6%
98.52%
0.6%
-0.74 km/h
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Continental PremiumContact 7 6.4%
98.73%
6.4%
-2.68 m
2
Nokian WetProof 3.0%
95.38%
3.0%
-1.28 m
3
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135 2.7%
95.08%
2.7%
-1.15 m
4
Pirelli Cinturato P7 (P7C2) 1.8%
94.10%
1.8%
-0.74 m
5
Vredestein Ultrac 0.5%
92.80%
0.5%
-0.20 m
6
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
92.34%
—
—
7
Michelin Primacy 4+ 0.2%
92.15%
0.2%
+0.08 m
8
Bridgestone Turanza 6 0.2%
92.11%
0.2%
+0.10 m
9
Toyo Proxes Comfort 2.5%
89.84%
2.5%
+1.05 m
10
Dunlop Sport BluResponse 2.5%
89.79%
2.5%
+1.07 m
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Nokian WetProof 0.6%
99.14%
0.6%
+0.41 km/h
2
Vredestein Ultrac 0.5%
99.10%
0.5%
+0.39 km/h
3
Continental PremiumContact 7 0.4%
98.96%
0.4%
+0.28 km/h
4
Pirelli Cinturato P7 (P7C2) 0.3%
98.90%
0.3%
+0.23 km/h
5
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
98.59%
—
—
6
Toyo Proxes Comfort 0.4%
98.17%
0.4%
-0.31 km/h
7
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135 0.7%
97.86%
0.7%
-0.54 km/h
8
Bridgestone Turanza 6 1.5%
97.06%
1.5%
-1.15 km/h
9
Dunlop Sport BluResponse 1.6%
96.98%
1.6%
-1.21 km/h
10
Michelin Primacy 4+ 2.1%
96.52%
2.1%
-1.55 km/h
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Continental PremiumContact 7 1.1%
98.83%
1.1%
—
2
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135 0.1%
97.77%
0.1%
—
3
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
97.70%
—
—
4
Vredestein Ultrac 0.5%
97.21%
0.5%
—
5
Toyo Proxes Comfort 1.0%
96.72%
1.0%
—
6
Dunlop Sport BluResponse 1.8%
95.94%
1.8%
—
7
Bridgestone Turanza 6 1.8%
95.92%
1.8%
—
8
Michelin Primacy 4+ 2.0%
95.74%
2.0%
—
9
Pirelli Cinturato P7 (P7C2) 2.3%
95.35%
2.3%
—
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Vredestein Ultrac 4.0%
98.57%
4.0%
+3.20 km/h
2
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135 0.9%
95.42%
0.9%
+0.68 km/h
3
Continental PremiumContact 7 0.8%
95.41%
0.8%
+0.67 km/h
4
Pirelli Cinturato P7 (P7C2) 0.8%
95.37%
0.8%
+0.64 km/h
5
Bridgestone Turanza 6 0.1%
94.69%
0.1%
+0.09 km/h
6
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
94.57%
—
—
7
Toyo Proxes Comfort 0.0%
94.55%
0.0%
-0.02 km/h
8
Dunlop Sport BluResponse 0.2%
94.37%
0.2%
-0.16 km/h
9
Michelin Primacy 4+ 0.7%
93.85%
0.7%
-0.58 km/h
10
Nokian WetProof 1.8%
92.80%
1.8%
-1.41 km/h
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Vredestein Ultrac 3.0%
98.12%
3.0%
—
2
Pirelli Cinturato P7 (P7C2) 1.6%
96.70%
1.6%
—
3
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
95.10%
—
—
4
Continental PremiumContact 7 1.0%
94.07%
1.0%
—
5
Bridgestone Turanza 6 4.2%
90.89%
4.2%
—
6
Dunlop Sport BluResponse 4.2%
90.89%
4.2%
—
7
Michelin Primacy 4+ 5.8%
89.31%
5.8%
—
8
Toyo Proxes Comfort 6.3%
88.79%
6.3%
—
9
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135 7.6%
87.45%
7.6%
—
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Nokian WetProof 0.0%
99.34%
0.0%
-0.03 dB
2
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
99.30%
—
—
3
Michelin Primacy 4+ 0.2%
99.06%
0.2%
+0.17 dB
4
Pirelli Cinturato P7 (P7C2) 0.3%
99.02%
0.3%
+0.20 dB
5
Vredestein Ultrac 0.9%
98.35%
0.9%
+0.68 dB
6
Bridgestone Turanza 6 1.2%
98.12%
1.2%
+0.85 dB
7
Toyo Proxes Comfort 1.2%
98.08%
1.2%
+0.88 dB
8
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135 1.3%
97.95%
1.3%
+0.97 dB
9
Dunlop Sport BluResponse 1.6%
97.72%
1.6%
+1.14 dB
10
Continental PremiumContact 7 1.7%
97.57%
1.7%
+1.25 dB
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Bridgestone Turanza 6 6.3%
99.02%
6.3%
-0.47 kg/t
2
Dunlop Sport BluResponse 1.3%
94.00%
1.3%
-0.10 kg/t
3
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
92.69%
—
—
4
Michelin Primacy 4+ 0.1%
92.62%
0.1%
+0.01 kg/t
5
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135 2.7%
89.98%
2.7%
+0.20 kg/t
6
Continental PremiumContact 7 3.5%
89.14%
3.5%
+0.27 kg/t
7
Pirelli Cinturato P7 (P7C2) 5.7%
87.03%
5.7%
+0.42 kg/t
8
Toyo Proxes Comfort 7.4%
85.32%
7.4%
+0.55 kg/t
9
Nokian WetProof 8.4%
84.34%
8.4%
+0.63 kg/t
10
Vredestein Ultrac 8.7%
83.99%
8.7%
+0.65 kg/t
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
100.00%
—
—
2
Michelin Primacy 4+ 11.2%
88.83%
11.2%
-5027 km
3
Continental PremiumContact 7 15.3%
84.67%
15.3%
-6900 km
4
Bridgestone Turanza 6 30.0%
69.97%
30.0%
-13512 km
5
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 K135 31.3%
68.74%
31.3%
-14067 km
6
Toyo Proxes Comfort 36.6%
63.37%
36.6%
-16481 km
7
Dunlop Sport BluResponse 36.8%
63.15%
36.8%
-16581 km
8
Nokian WetProof 38.2%
61.84%
38.2%
-17173 km
9
Pirelli Cinturato P7 (P7C2) 40.6%
59.43%
40.6%
-18257 km
10
Vredestein Ultrac 56.5%
43.51%
56.5%
-25422 km

Head-to-head comparison

Analytical Review

The EfficientGrip Performance 2 is a summer tire designed with a distinct philosophy: to maximize longevity and comfort without sacrificing predictable, safe handling. Independent tests confirm it is a leader in wear resistance and one of the quietest tyres on the market. However, this focus on efficiency comes with a significant trade-off in braking performance, particularly on dry surfaces.

Key Strengths

  • Class-leading durability and comfort. These are the tyre’s defining attributes. It ranks first in projected mileage, outlasting its nearest Michelin rival by an impressive margin of over 5,000 km. This exceptional durability, combined with its status as one of the quietest tyres available, makes it a benchmark for long-distance comfort.
  • Secure handling. The tyre demonstrates competent and safe cornering behaviour. On dry tarmac, it places in the top tier, and its wet handling remains securely within the lead group.
  • Good efficiency. The tire ranks among the top three competitors in terms of rolling resistance and boasts an outstanding service life, making it one of the most cost-effective options in the premium segment over the long term.

Compromises

  • Braking performance. The main weakness of this tire is its braking distance. On dry asphalt, it ranks near the bottom of its class, requiring over 1.2 meters more to come to a complete stop compared to the category leader. This gap increases on wet surfaces, requiring an additional 2.5 meters to go to a complete stop. These differences are significant and can have a direct impact on safety in emergencies.
  • Aquaplaning resistance. Performance in deep water is mixed. The tyre offers excellent resistance to lateral aquaplaning (when cornering), ranking among the top three. However, its performance on straights is average: it lags behind specialised ‘rain’ tyres, but is on par with most of its direct competitors in its class, which is an acceptable compromise.

Head-to-Head Comparison

  • vs. Continental PremiumContact 7: Goodyear offers superior mileage, comfort, and economy. However, the Continental is in another league for braking, stopping the vehicle significantly shorter on both wet and dry roads.
  • vs. Michelin Primacy 4+: Goodyear leads in wear resistance and quietness. Michelin holds a distinct advantage in dry braking performance.
  • vs. Pirelli Cinturato P7 (P7C2): The Goodyear is the more durable and comfortable tyre. The Pirelli delivers substantially shorter braking distances in all conditions.

Conclusion

The Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 is an ideal choice for the practical, high-mileage driver who prioritizes long-term value and ride comfort. It excels on long motorway journeys where low noise, fuel efficiency, and predictable handling are paramount.

However, if maximum braking power and the sharpest response are your top priorities, this model is not the optimal choice. For drivers seeking the highest level of active safety in braking, alternatives such as the Continental PremiumContact 7 or Pirelli Cinturato P7 offer a more compelling and reassuring performance.

Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 Test History

Goodyear has been tested many times by various magazines in different sizes and different years. Below are the results, accompanied by a detailed analysis.

Year
Magazine
Size
Place
Score
2025
Motor
205/55 R16
2 (7)
2024
Auto Bild R17
225/55 R17
5 (10)
2024
Auto Bild
205/55 R16
4 (20)
Good
2023
Tyre Reviews
205/55 R16
4 (13)
Highly Recommended
2023
Motor
205/55 R16
5 (8)
2022
Vi Bilagare
205/55 R16
6 (10)
2022
Auto Zeitung
215/55 R17
3 (10)
Highly Recommended
2022
Auto Bild
215/55 R17
1 (21)
2022
Al Volante
205/60 R16
5 (8)
2021
Vi Bilagare
225/45 R17
2 (8)
2021
Auto Bild
205/55 R16
9 (20)
Good
2021
AMS
195/55 R16
4 (11)
Good
2020
Tyre Reviews
205/55 R16
2 (12)
Test Winner
2020
Teknikens Varld
225/50 R17
2 (10)
2020
Ai Volante
225/45 R17
6 (10)
2020
Autonavigator
205/55 R16
2 (7)
Very Good

Comparison vs Market

The tire performs above the median in 8 testing areas while showing lower results in 2 areas. Notable advantages are observed in wear resistance (+25.46%) and rolling resistance (+8.35%). Most performance characteristics remain close to the market median.
8 areas above the median
Dry handling (+0.51%)
Wet braking (+0.79%)
Wet handling (+1.59%)
Wet lateral handling (+1.96%)
Lateral aqua (+4.21%)
Rolling resistance (+8.35%)
Noise (+1.13%)
Wear resistance (+25.46%)
2 areas below the median
Dry braking (-0.23%)
Straight aqua (-0.82%)
goodyear
alltyretests
AllTyreTests.com
Add a comment