Home » Summer

Vredestein Ultrac Pro Tests & Review

Reading 1 min Modified by

Vredestein Ultrac Pro phoho, test, review, ratings

Vredestein Ultrac Pro is an Ultra High Performance summer tire with an asymmetrical tread pattern, designed for passenger cars.

Contents
  1. Key performance
  2. Vredestein Ultrac Pro Test Results
  3. Vredestein Ultrac Pro vs. Competitors

Key performance

Overall rating: 91.3% (51 measurements from 6 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)
    Poor
    Based on 6 tests|0 wins|Avg. pos. 8th|4-17th range|Rating: 91.6%
    Performance Chart
    • Average: 2 (33%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    • Weak: 3 (50%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    • Poor: 1 (17%) i A poor result, significantly worse than the test average.
    Detailed Test Results: 6 tests analyzed (2024-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 22.2% of competitors per test
    • ➖ No first-place finishes
    • ➖ No TOP-3 finishes
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 6 of 6
    • ⚠️ Worst-3 finishes: 4 of 6
    • ❌ Last-place finish: 1 of 6
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:35 m (2025 Auto Zeitung)
    • Worst result:39.1 m (2024 Auto Bild Sports Car)
    • Average result:36.4 m
    • Typical gap to leader:+2.1 – +4 m
    • Max gap to leader:+4.4 m (2024 EVO)

  • Dry handling

    (2.5/5)
    Average
    Based on 6 tests|0 wins|Avg. pos. 6.5th|2-15th range|Rating: 98.1%
    Performance Chart
    • Average: 4 (67%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    • Weak: 2 (33%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    Detailed Test Results: 6 tests analyzed (2024-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 42.1% of competitors per test
    • ➖ No first-place finishes
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 1 of 6
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 5 of 6
    • ⚠️ Worst-3 finishes: 1 of 6
    • ✅ No last-place finishes

Wet Performance

  • Wet braking

    (2.5/5)
    Average
    Based on 6 tests|0 wins|Avg. pos. 6.8th|2-17th range|Rating: 90.1%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 1 (17%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 3 (50%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    • Weak: 2 (33%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    Detailed Test Results: 6 tests analyzed (2024-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 40.3% of competitors per test
    • ➖ No first-place finishes
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 1 of 6
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 5 of 6
    • ⚠️ Worst-3 finishes: 1 of 6
    • ✅ No last-place finishes
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:32.3 m (2024 EVO)
    • Worst result:53.1 m (2024 Auto Bild Sports Car)
    • Average result:46.3 m
    • Typical gap to leader:+3.9 – +6.1 m
    • Max gap to leader:+7.5 m (2025 Auto Bild Sports Car R20)

  • Wet handling

    (2.5/5)
    Average
    Based on 6 tests|0 wins|Avg. pos. 7.2th|3-18th range|Rating: 96.2%
    Performance Chart
    • Average: 3 (50%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    • Weak: 3 (50%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    Detailed Test Results: 6 tests analyzed (2024-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 35.4% of competitors per test
    • ➖ No first-place finishes
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 1 of 6
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 4 of 6
    • ⚠️ Worst-3 finishes: 3 of 6
    • ✅ No last-place finishes

  • Wet lateral handling

    (2.5/5)
    Average
    Based on 4 tests|0 wins|Avg. pos. 9.3th|4-19th range|Rating: 95.7%
    Performance Chart
    • Average: 2 (50%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    • Weak: 2 (50%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    Detailed Test Results: 4 tests analyzed (2024-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 23.5% of competitors per test
    • ➖ No first-place finishes
    • ➖ No TOP-3 finishes
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 4 of 4
    • ⚠️ Worst-3 finishes: 3 of 4
    • ✅ No last-place finishes

Aquaplaning resistance

  • Straight aqua

    (4.5/5)
    Exemplary
    Based on 6 tests|2 wins|Avg. pos. 3th|1-5th range|Rating: 98.5%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 4 (67%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 2 (33%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    Detailed Test Results: 6 tests analyzed (2024-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 75.5% of competitors per test
    • 🏆 Victories (1st place): 2 of 6
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 3 of 6
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 1 of 6
    • ✅ No worst-3 finishes
    • ✅ No last-place finishes
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:104.5 km/h (2025 Auto Bild Sports Car R20)
    • Worst result:71.76 km/h (2024 EVO)
    • Average result:84.8 km/h
    • Typical gap to leader:-2.85 – -0.7 km/h
    • Max gap to leader:-4.8 km/h (2025 Auto Bild Sports Car R19)

  • Lateral aqua

    (3/5)
    Average
    Based on 4 tests|0 wins|Avg. pos. 4.5th|2-7th range|Rating: 91%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 2 (50%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Weak: 2 (50%) i The result is noticeably below the average.
    Detailed Test Results: 4 tests analyzed (2024-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 50.9% of competitors per test
    • ➖ No first-place finishes
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 2 of 4
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 2 of 4
    • ⚠️ Worst-3 finishes: 2 of 4
    • ✅ No last-place finishes

Secondary

  • Rolling resistance

    (4/5)
    Good
    Based on 6 tests|1 wins|Avg. pos. 5.5th|1-14th range|Rating: 90.1%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 2 (33%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 4 (67%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    Detailed Test Results: 6 tests analyzed (2024-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 56.9% of competitors per test
    • 🏆 Victories (1st place): 1 of 6
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 3 of 6
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 3 of 6
    • ✅ No worst-3 finishes
    • ✅ No last-place finishes
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:8 kg/t (2025 Auto Bild Sports Car R20)
    • Worst result:9.19 kg/t (2025 Auto Bild)
    • Average result:8.7 kg/t
    • Typical gap to leader:+0.3 – +1.59 kg/t
    • Max gap to leader:+1.6 kg/t (2025 Auto Bild Sports Car R19)

  • Noise

    (4.5/5)
    Exemplary
    Based on 5 tests|2 wins|Avg. pos. 4th|1-12th range|Rating: 98.9%
    Performance Chart
    • Good: 3 (60%) i A solid performance, clearly above the average.
    • Average: 2 (40%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    Detailed Test Results: 5 tests analyzed (2024-2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 77.6% of competitors per test
    • 🏆 Victories (1st place): 2 of 5
    • ✅ Podium finishes (TOP-3): 3 of 5
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 1 of 5
    • ✅ No worst-3 finishes
    • ✅ No last-place finishes
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:68 dB (2025 Auto Zeitung)
    • Worst result:74 dB (2025 Auto Bild Sports Car R19)
    • Average result:71.6 dB
    • Max gap to leader:+2.2 dB (2025 Auto Bild)

  • Wear resistance

    (2.5/5)
    Average
    Based on 2 tests|0 wins|Avg. pos. 9th|6-12th range|Rating: 63%
    Performance Chart
    • Average: 2 (100%) i A typical result, close to the test average.
    Detailed Test Results: 2 tests analyzed (2025)
    Key statistics
    • Typically outperforms 43.3% of competitors per test
    • ➖ No first-place finishes
    • ➖ No TOP-3 finishes
    • ⚠️ Bottom-half finishes: 2 of 2
    • ✅ No worst-3 finishes
    • ✅ No last-place finishes
    Results in numbers
    • Best result:32930km (2025 Auto Bild)
    • Worst result:32500km (2025 Auto Zeitung)
    • Average result:32715km
    • Max gap to leader:-21090km (2025 Auto Bild)

Vredestein Ultrac Pro Test Results

Year
Magazine
Size
Place
Score
2025
Auto Zeitung
225/45 R18
6 (10)
2025
Auto Bild
225/40 R18
13 (20)
2025
Auto Bild Sports Car R19
245/35 R19
5 (8)
2025
Auto Bild Sports Car R20
245/35 R20
6 (7)
2024
EVO
235/35 R19
5 (7)
2024
Auto Bild Sports Car
265/35 R20
3 (7)

Vredestein Ultrac Pro vs. Competitors

Key Statistics

  • ❌ Dry braking #10 of 10
  • ❌ Dry handling #10 of 10
  • ❌ Wet braking #10 of 10
  • ❌ Wet handling #10 of 10
  • ❌ Wet lateral handling #10 of 10
  • ✅ Straight aqua #2 of 10
  • ⚠️ Lateral aqua #7 of 10
  • ✅ Noise #2 of 10
  • ✅ Rolling resistance #2 of 10
  • ⚠️ Wear resistance #6 of 9
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Continental SportContact 7 7.8%
99.44%
7.8%
-2.57 m
2
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 6.6%
98.21%
6.6%
-2.16 m
3
Michelin Pilot Sport 5 6.1%
97.78%
6.1%
-2.02 m
4
Bridgestone Potenza Sport 6.0%
97.68%
6.0%
-1.99 m
5
Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 5.8%
97.45%
5.8%
-1.91 m
6
Toyo Proxes Sport 2 5.7%
97.37%
5.7%
-1.89 m
7
Nokian PowerProof 5.7%
97.35%
5.7%
-1.88 m
8
Pirelli P Zero (PZ4) 5.6%
97.29%
5.6%
-1.86 m
9
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2 4.6%
96.28%
4.6%
-1.53 m
10
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
91.65%
—
—
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Continental SportContact 7 1.7%
99.82%
1.7%
+2.03 km/h
2
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 1.3%
99.44%
1.3%
+1.57 km/h
3
Bridgestone Potenza Sport 1.0%
99.12%
1.0%
+1.19 km/h
4
Toyo Proxes Sport 2 1.0%
99.09%
1.0%
+1.15 km/h
5
Pirelli P Zero (PZ4) 0.9%
99.02%
0.9%
+1.08 km/h
6
Michelin Pilot Sport 5 0.9%
99.00%
0.9%
+1.05 km/h
7
Nokian PowerProof 0.6%
98.77%
0.6%
+0.77 km/h
8
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2 0.4%
98.50%
0.4%
+0.45 km/h
9
Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 0.1%
98.25%
0.1%
+0.15 km/h
10
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
98.13%
—
—
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Continental SportContact 7 8.9%
98.97%
8.9%
-3.72 m
2
Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 5.7%
95.81%
5.7%
-2.40 m
3
Michelin Pilot Sport 5 5.6%
95.73%
5.6%
-2.36 m
4
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 5.0%
95.14%
5.0%
-2.12 m
5
Bridgestone Potenza Sport 4.7%
94.76%
4.7%
-1.96 m
6
Pirelli P Zero (PZ4) 2.1%
92.22%
2.1%
-0.89 m
7
Nokian PowerProof 2.1%
92.21%
2.1%
-0.89 m
8
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2 1.1%
91.20%
1.1%
-0.46 m
9
Toyo Proxes Sport 2 0.7%
90.76%
0.7%
-0.28 m
10
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
90.10%
—
—
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Bridgestone Potenza Sport 3.1%
99.36%
3.1%
+2.51 km/h
2
Pirelli P Zero (PZ4) 2.6%
98.80%
2.6%
+2.06 km/h
3
Michelin Pilot Sport 5 2.3%
98.49%
2.3%
+1.81 km/h
4
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 2.1%
98.35%
2.1%
+1.70 km/h
5
Continental SportContact 7 2.1%
98.32%
2.1%
+1.68 km/h
6
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2 1.5%
97.74%
1.5%
+1.21 km/h
7
Nokian PowerProof 1.5%
97.73%
1.5%
+1.20 km/h
8
Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 0.9%
97.16%
0.9%
+0.74 km/h
9
Toyo Proxes Sport 2 0.0%
96.28%
0.0%
+0.04 km/h
10
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
96.23%
—
—
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Bridgestone Potenza Sport 4.0%
99.68%
4.0%
—
2
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 4.0%
99.61%
4.0%
—
3
Continental SportContact 7 3.5%
99.18%
3.5%
—
4
Michelin Pilot Sport 5 3.5%
99.14%
3.5%
—
5
Pirelli P Zero (PZ4) 3.1%
98.74%
3.1%
—
6
Toyo Proxes Sport 2 2.6%
98.27%
2.6%
—
7
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2 1.6%
97.22%
1.6%
—
8
Nokian PowerProof 1.4%
97.09%
1.4%
—
9
Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 1.3%
96.96%
1.3%
—
10
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
95.65%
—
—
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2 0.0%
98.57%
0.0%
+0.03 km/h
2
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
98.53%
—
—
3
Michelin Pilot Sport 5 0.5%
98.07%
0.5%
-0.34 km/h
4
Continental SportContact 7 0.7%
97.80%
0.7%
-0.53 km/h
5
Bridgestone Potenza Sport 1.2%
97.38%
1.2%
-0.84 km/h
6
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 2.1%
96.39%
2.1%
-1.56 km/h
7
Toyo Proxes Sport 2 2.5%
95.99%
2.5%
-1.86 km/h
8
Pirelli P Zero (PZ4) 2.8%
95.71%
2.8%
-2.06 km/h
9
Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 4.3%
94.21%
4.3%
-3.15 km/h
10
Nokian PowerProof 4.7%
93.87%
4.7%
-3.41 km/h
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Toyo Proxes Sport 2 7.5%
98.54%
7.5%
—
2
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2 6.9%
97.97%
6.9%
—
3
Michelin Pilot Sport 5 1.9%
92.90%
1.9%
—
4
Bridgestone Potenza Sport 1.7%
92.73%
1.7%
—
5
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 1.5%
92.57%
1.5%
—
6
Pirelli P Zero (PZ4) 0.4%
91.45%
0.4%
—
7
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
91.03%
—
—
8
Continental SportContact 7 0.6%
90.41%
0.6%
—
9
Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 1.8%
89.21%
1.8%
—
10
Nokian PowerProof 4.1%
86.93%
4.1%
—
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 0.0%
98.93%
0.0%
-0.01 dB
2
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
98.92%
—
—
3
Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 0.5%
98.39%
0.5%
+0.38 dB
4
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2 0.5%
98.38%
0.5%
+0.39 dB
5
Pirelli P Zero (PZ4) 0.9%
98.04%
0.9%
+0.63 dB
6
Continental SportContact 7 1.1%
97.85%
1.1%
+0.77 dB
7
Toyo Proxes Sport 2 1.2%
97.72%
1.2%
+0.87 dB
8
Nokian PowerProof 1.3%
97.61%
1.3%
+0.94 dB
9
Bridgestone Potenza Sport 2.1%
96.81%
2.1%
+1.52 dB
10
Michelin Pilot Sport 5 2.2%
96.76%
2.2%
+1.55 dB
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Continental SportContact 7 0.9%
91.05%
0.9%
-0.07 kg/t
2
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
90.14%
—
—
3
Michelin Pilot Sport 5 1.2%
88.95%
1.2%
+0.10 kg/t
4
Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 1.3%
88.80%
1.3%
+0.11 kg/t
5
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 1.4%
88.70%
1.4%
+0.12 kg/t
6
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2 1.9%
88.20%
1.9%
+0.16 kg/t
7
Nokian PowerProof 4.5%
85.65%
4.5%
+0.36 kg/t
8
Pirelli P Zero (PZ4) 5.6%
84.57%
5.6%
+0.45 kg/t
9
Toyo Proxes Sport 2 6.9%
83.28%
6.9%
+0.55 kg/t
10
Bridgestone Potenza Sport 8.5%
81.62%
8.5%
+0.68 kg/t
#
Model
Performance ⓘ
% ⓘ
Abs. ⓘ
1
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 32.0%
94.93%
32.0%
+17255 km
2
Michelin Pilot Sport 5 30.7%
93.64%
30.7%
+16555 km
3
Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2 8.8%
71.74%
8.8%
+4729 km
4
Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 6.3%
69.30%
6.3%
+3411 km
5
Bridgestone Potenza Sport 5.0%
68.01%
5.0%
+2716 km
6
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
62.98%
—
—
7
Pirelli P Zero (PZ4) 6.7%
56.32%
6.7%
-3597 km
8
Toyo Proxes Sport 2 7.0%
55.95%
7.0%
-3796 km
9
Nokian PowerProof 12.6%
50.33%
12.6%
-6830 km

vredestein
alltyretests
AllTyreTests.com
Add a comment