How tire technology improved: 25 years of road tests

Every three to six years a tire maker replaces a best-seller with a new generation and promises shorter braking, longer life and lower rolling resistance. We wanted to know how much of that shows up when someone else does the testing, and how far tire technology has come since 2000. So we went through 745 independent tire tests from 2000 to 2026: 677 from our database (Auto Bild, ADAC, Auto Express, Auto Motor und Sport, Sport Auto, Auto Zeitung, evo and others) and 68 ADAC tests from 2000–2016 that we recovered from the Internet Archive. We followed 21 tire families through 62 changes of generation.

So do new tire generations really get better? Usually, but not always, and what gets better has changed over the years.

• 42 of 62 new generations rated higher than the tire they replaced, about two in three.
• The longest lines show how far tires have come. Continental's winter tire went from beating 89% of a typical test field (WinterContact TS 810, 2004) to 99% (TS 870), and its touring tire from 79% (ContiPremiumContact, 2000) to 97% (PremiumContact 7).
• The kind of progress changed. Before 2012 new generations made the biggest overall jumps while rolling resistance often got worse. From 2012 to 2018 wet grip and rolling resistance improved together, which used to be a trade. Since 2019 the typical step is small (+1 points, against +5 before 2012), and the gains have gone mostly into tread life.
• The biggest leaps came when a maker caught up: Bridgestone's Blizzak LM001 → LM005, Potenza S001 → Potenza Sport and Turanza T001 → T005, Goodyear's UltraGrip Performance 2 → Gen-1 and Michelin's Pilot Sport 3 → 4.
• The biggest drop was Bridgestone's Turanza ER300 → T001 in 2012, from 88 to 68. The T001's successor then made the biggest touring-tire leap in the data.

25 years in two charts

Continental PremiumContactMichelin PrimacyBridgestone Turanza

Continental WinterContactMichelin AlpinDunlop Winter Sport

Continental's two lines climb almost every time. Michelin's Alpin and Dunlop's Winter Sport zigzag: a strong generation, a weaker one, then a strong one again. Bridgestone's Turanza shows the widest swings of any family in the data.

How we measured progress

Comparing a 2005 tire with a 2025 tire is harder than it sounds. Testers change cars, sizes, tracks and surfaces every year, and over 20 years the cars themselves changed: a Golf 4 and a Golf 8 do not stop in the same distance on the same tires. So 32 metres of wet braking in one test and 32 metres in another are not the same result, and we do not compare raw metres across tests.

What we do compare is how a tire did against the other tires in the same test: same car, same track, same day. That cancels the car, the track and the weather. Then we allow for the strength of each test field: fourth of twelve premium tires beats first of six budget ones. Tires that stayed in tests for many years link the years together: the ContiPremiumContact 5 was tested from 2012 to 2021, the Michelin Alpin A4 from 2010 to 2019. Each met many old and new rivals, which puts every tire on one scale, the same way chess ratings compare players who never met.

The result is a field rating: the share of a typical test field the tire would finish ahead of. A field rating of 95 means it beats 95% of the tires in an average test, whether that test was in 2004 or 2024. The tables also show each generation's road-test scores for wet, dry, snow and tread life on our 0–100 scale (the average tested tire scores 70), built the same way from the individual results.

Does this really compare years? Two checks say yes. First, the same tire slides down over time as newer rivals arrive: a tire that beat half the field slides to beating 43% after five years and 36% after ten (summer tires; winter: 42% and 33%). The rating sees that slide, so it measures progress rather than just rank. Second, the EU tire label, measured in a lab against a fixed reference tire, tells the same story: the share of sizes graded A for wet grip went from 4% for the PremiumContact 2 to 100% for the PremiumContact 7, from 14% to 85% from the SportContact 3 to the SportContact 7, and from 9% to 93% from the first Eagle F1 Asymmetric to the Asymmetric 6.

The ADAC archive. ADAC's tests before 2017 are no longer on its website, but the Internet Archive kept them. They give each tire a grade from 0.5 to 5.5 for dry, wet, snow, ice, noise, fuel use and wear. ADAC changed its grading scale over the years, so we use the grades only to compare tires inside the same test, like everything else here. ADAC itself runs reference tires with known properties in every test to correct for changing conditions (ADAC test method, 2015).

Why our tire and compare pages show other numbers. The TWG score there answers another question: which tire is the better buy today. It counts a test about 10% less for every year of its age, adds owner reviews (40% of each category, 60% for comfort), weights the categories by what matters most for safety, and uses another scale: the average tested tire scores 70 there, and 50 in field rating. The field rating here uses road tests only and counts every test the same, because it asks how strong a tire was over its whole test record. So a tire that won its early tests can rate high here and lower there, and a new generation that rates lower here can come out ahead on its compare page: the Turanza T005 rates above the Turanza 6 in this article, but below it on their compare page.

Two cautions. Tires with fewer than about ten tests (most 2025–26 launches and the oldest generations) can still move by several points. And the oldest generations come mostly from ADAC alone, so they rest on fewer tests than the newer ones.

Every generation change, ranked

◀ worsebetter ▶

Bridgestone Blizzak LM001 → LM005+27

Bridgestone Potenza S001 → Sport+27

Goodyear Ultra Grip Performance 2 → Gen-1+27

Bridgestone Turanza T001 → T005+23

Goodyear EfficientGrip → EfficientGrip Performance+21

Dunlop SP Winter Sport M3 → 3D+20

Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2 → C3+18

Vredestein Quatrac 5 → Pro+16

Michelin Pilot Sport 3 → 4+15

Goodyear Asymmetric 3 → 5+11

Continental ContiPremiumContact → ContiPremiumContact 2+10

Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric → Asymmetric 2+10

Michelin Pilot Sport 2 → 3+10

Michelin Alpin 5 → 6+9

Michelin Primacy 3 → 4+8

Michelin CrossClimate → CrossClimate++7

Goodyear Vector 4Seasons → Vector 4Seasons Gen-2+7

Dunlop SP Sport Maxx TT → Sport Maxx RT+7

Continental WinterContact TS 850 P → 870 P+7

Dunlop SP Winter Sport 4D → Winter Sport 5+6

Continental ContiSportContact 3 → 5+6

Continental WinterContact TS 810 → 830+5

Michelin Primacy HP → 3+5

Continental AllSeasonContact → AllSeasonContact 2+5

Continental SportContact 6 → 7+4

Pirelli P Zero (PZ4) → P Zero (PZ5)+4

Continental ContiPremiumContact 2 → 5+3

Michelin Alpin A2 → A3+3

Michelin Alpin A3 → A4+3

Continental WinterContact TS 830 → 850+3

Michelin CrossClimate+ → CrossClimate 2+3

Continental ContiPremiumContact 5 → PremiumContact 6+3

Continental PremiumContact 6 → 7+2

Goodyear Ultra Grip Performance Gen-1 → UltraGrip Performance++2

Goodyear Asymmetric 5 → 6+1

Continental WinterContact TS 860 → 870+1

Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance → EfficientGrip Performance 2+1

Goodyear UltraGrip Performance+ → Ultra Grip Performance 3+1

Vredestein Quatrac 3 → 50

Continental ContiSportContact 5 → SportContact 60

Continental WinterContact TS 850 → 8600

Continental WinterContact TS 830 P → 850 P0

Bridgestone Potenza Sport → Potenza Sport Evo0

Pirelli P Zero → P Zero (PZ4)−1

Nokian WR D3 → D4−1

Nokian WR Snowproof → Snowproof 2−2

Goodyear Vector 4Seasons Gen-2 → Gen-3−2

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 → 5−3

Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 → 6−4

Michelin Alpin A4 → 5−5

Michelin Alpin 6 → 7−5

Dunlop Sport Maxx RT → RT2−5

Dunlop SP Winter Sport 3D → 4D−5

Pirelli Cinturato P7 → Cinturato P7 C2−6

Michelin CrossClimate 2 → 3−6

Michelin Alpin → Alpin A2−6

Vredestein Quatrac Pro → Pro+−8

Goodyear Asymmetric 2 → 3−8

Michelin Primacy 4 → 5−13

Nokian WR D4 → Snowproof−14

Bridgestone Turanza T005 → 6−16

Bridgestone Turanza ER300 → T001−20

Big gains cluster where a maker was behind. Near the top there is little room left, so a market leader's new generation tends to add 1–5 points. Several drops are deliberate trades of grip for tread life (see below).

The latest step in the families without a section of their own: Pirelli's Cinturato P7 C2 vs C3 (+18) and P Zero PZ4 vs PZ5 (+4), Continental's AllSeasonContact vs AllSeasonContact 2 (+5), Goodyear's UltraGrip Performance+ vs Performance 3 (+1), EfficientGrip Performance vs Performance 2 (+1) and Vector 4Seasons Gen-2 vs Gen-3 (−2), Nokian's WR Snowproof vs Snowproof 2 (−2), Dunlop's Sport Maxx RT vs RT2 (−5) and Vredestein's Quatrac Pro vs Pro+ (−8).

What improved, era by era

Here is every generation step again, split by when the new tire went on sale, with the median change in each road-test score (in points on the 0–100 scale) and, in brackets, how many steps improved in that category.

Three eras show up. Before 2012 new generations made the biggest overall jumps (median +5 field-rating points), but efficiency got worse in 6 of 9 steps. From 2012 to 2018 wet grip and efficiency improved together, the result of new silica compounds (see below). Since 2019 the typical new generation is only slightly better overall, but it lasts clearly longer: tread life improved in 14 of 20 steps, by a median +8 points. Noise is the least consistent column: quieter tires were often bought with grip.

Continental PremiumContact: five generations, five steps up

This is the cleanest progression in the data. Each generation rated higher than the last, from beating 79% of a typical field in 2001 to 97% for the PremiumContact 7, which also lasts longer than average. The last step was the smallest: see PremiumContact 6 vs 7.

• ContiPremiumContact (2000) replaced the ContiEcoContact CP: an asymmetric tread, a third-generation silica compound and a "bionic" contour modelled on a cat's paw that widens the footprint under braking. Tyrepress
• ContiPremiumContact 2 (2005): silica tread compound and blocks with alternating steep and shallow front edges, steep ones to push water away and shallow ones for dry grip. ERJ
• ContiPremiumContact 5 (2012): "3D" block edges that stop blocks folding under braking, more sipes, "aqua grooves" and shoulder blocks taken from the sport tires. Continental claimed 15% shorter wet braking, 8% lower rolling resistance and 12% more mileage than the CPC 2. Tyrepress
• PremiumContact 6 (2017) replaced both the PremiumContact 5 and the SportContact 5, with sport-tire shoulders on a wear-resistant compound. Continental claimed +15% mileage; its tread-life score jumped from 65 to 91. Tyrepress
• PremiumContact 7 (2022): new "RedChili" compound meant to grip from cold, an "adaptive" tread whose side openings drain water going straight and close in corners, and tread tuned per size. Continental claimed up to 7% better wet braking and +10% mileage over the PC6. Continental

Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric: a step back, then two leaps

The Asymmetric 3 is a reminder that "new" isn't automatically "better": it rated lower than the Asymmetric 2 it replaced. The Asymmetric 5 and 6 then put Goodyear back on top. The Asymmetric 6 has a top-five field rating among the summer tires in our data with ten or more tests, and the highest tread-life score of the line (Asymmetric 5 vs 6).

• Eagle F1 Asymmetric (2007): moved from a directional to an asymmetric tread, with an aramid reinforcement in the inner sidewall for even contact pressure in corners. Tyrepress
• Asymmetric 2 (2011): the first "ActiveBraking" tread. Its tapered blocks flatten under braking, which Goodyear says gives about 30% more rubber on the road. Tyrepress
• Asymmetric 3 (2016): "Grip Booster" compound with an adhesive resin and a lighter construction. Goodyear's 9% wet braking advantage was measured against rivals, not the Asymmetric 2. Tyrepress
• Asymmetric 5 (2019): a refined wet compound and a tread that flexes less sideways. Goodyear claimed 4% shorter wet braking than the Asymmetric 3; its wet score went from 83 to 95. Tyrepress
• Asymmetric 6 (2022): a new resin system in the tread for more micro-contact in the wet, a contact patch that grows in extreme manoeuvres, and "EV-ready" changes: thinner sipes for less noise, lower weight and an aerodynamic sidewall. Goodyear There was never an Asymmetric 4.

Michelin Pilot Sport: one huge leap, then wear

The step from Pilot Sport 3 to Pilot Sport 4 is one of the biggest in the data, from 82 to 97. The Pilot Sport 5 rated slightly lower but lasted longer: its tread-life score is 92 against 81 for the PS4. That is the trade Michelin said it was making. Compare the Pilot Sport 4 and 5 side by side.

• Pilot Sport 2 (2004): a "Variable Contact Patch" that puts more rubber on the road in hard cornering, and different compounds on the inner and outer half of the tread. Modern Tire Dealer
• Pilot Sport 3 (2010): Michelin claimed 10% longer wear and 10% lower rolling resistance than the Pilot Sport 2, with dry performance unchanged. Tyrepress
• Pilot Sport 4 (2016): a new "Dynamic Response" belt of hybrid aramid and nylon that keeps the contact patch steady at speed, plus "functional elastomers" that help the silica mix evenly through the rubber.
• Pilot Sport 5 (2022): "MaxTouch" construction to spread forces for even wear and a two-zone tread, open on the inside for water and solid on the outside for dry grip. Michelin

Michelin Primacy: grip, then longevity, then efficiency

* Year of the first test; the launch year is not confirmed.

The Primacy 4 was a big step up from the Primacy 3. Since then the line has gone sideways on grip and forward on tread life. The Primacy 5 has the lowest field rating of the three recent Primacys so far (11 tests). Michelin claims 4% shorter wet braking than the Primacy 4+, which our data doesn't show yet. See Primacy 4 vs Primacy 5.

• Primacy HP (about 2005) replaced the Pilot Primacy, which beat only 48% of the field in its two ADAC tests. Michelin sold it on tread life, claiming 25% more than rivals in a TÜV test. Tyrepress
• Primacy 3 (2012) was designed from crash data (about 20,000 accidents, 70% of them on dry roads), so it focused on dry braking, with a resin-plasticised silica compound and self-locking sipes. L'Argus
• Primacy 4 (2018): the first Primacy sold on "safe when new, safe when worn". Squarer grooves keep clearing water down to the legal limit. Michelin
• Primacy 5 (2025): 10% more groove volume and a quieter pattern. Michelin claims 18% more mileage and 4% shorter wet braking than the 4+. Michelin

Continental SportContact: from strong to dominant

The SportContact 7 won 18 of its 25 tests and has the highest field rating of any summer tire in our data (99). It stopped 7% shorter than the test average in the wet. Continental claimed 8% shorter wet braking than the SportContact 6, which stopped 2% shorter than average, so our data supports the claim (SportContact 6 vs 7). Two generations earlier, the ContiSportContact 2 came out top of both ADAC tests it ran in, in 2001 and 2004, on ADAC's category grades.

• ContiSportContact 5 (2011): the first "Black Chili" compound, which mixes short-chain polymers that absorb braking vibration (more grip) with long-chain polymers that waste less energy when rolling. Tyrepress
• SportContact 6 (2015): an "Aralon 350" cap ply (two aramid strands braided with one nylon) under the tread and different tread elements across the width. Tyrepress
• SportContact 7 (2021): an adaptive contact patch that moves to the outer shoulder in dry corners, and tread, sidewall and casing tuned for each vehicle class. Tyrepress

Bridgestone: the biggest drop and the biggest leaps

* Year of the first test; the launch year is not confirmed.

The Turanza ER300 was a strong touring tire, beating 88% of a typical field in ADAC's tests from 2005 to 2010. Its successor, the Turanza T001 (2012), fell to 68 and won none of its 31 tests: its wet score stayed level, but it lost on dry grip and tread life. The T005 (2018) then jumped to 91, with the best efficiency score of any tire in this article. The Turanza 6 traded some of that back for tread life: see Turanza T005 vs Turanza 6.

Bridgestone launched the T001 at the 2012 Geneva motor show, citing test wins, but did not say what it changed against the ER300. Tyrepress

The Potenza S001 stayed on sale for over a decade and spent most of it mid-table. The Potenza Sport (2021) jumped straight to the front, beating 94% of a typical field. Bridgestone credits its virtual tire development, which predicts performance before a prototype is built, plus 3D sipes and a new hybrid crown reinforcement. Tyrepress The 2026 Potenza Sport Evo has only 6 tests so far (Potenza Sport vs Sport Evo).

The Blizzak LM001 won none of its 13 tests. Its successor, the LM005, won 22 of 52, and stopped 8% shorter than the test average in the wet, the best wet braking of any winter tire with ten or more wet-braking results in our data. Bridgestone credited a high-silica compound with a new mixing process that spreads the silica more evenly. Tyre Trade It wore fast, though. The Blizzak 6 (2024) gave up some of that wet lead for tread life: Bridgestone claims 32% more than the LM005, and its tread-life score went from 41 to 77. Bridgestone Compare the Blizzak LM005 and Blizzak 6 side by side.

Continental WinterContact: five generations at the top

* Year of the first test; the launch year is not confirmed.

From the TS 810 to the TS 870, every generation rated higher than the one before, and since the TS 850 Continental's winter tire has won most of the tests it entered (19 of 28, 17 of 30 and 14 of 25). The snow score shows where the early gains came from: 83 for the TS 810, 94 for the TS 830. The TS 860 then moved the balance toward wet grip. The larger-size "P" line: TS 830 P 89, TS 850 P 89, TS 870 P 96 (TS 850 P vs TS 870 P).

• TS 830 (2008) replaced the TS 810: a new tread structure with an ice-oriented centre and snow-oriented shoulders, new polymers, and the first Continental tire tuned to work with stability control. Continental claimed +7% on ice, +5% wet and dry and +6% mileage. Tyrepress
• TS 850 (2012): as many block edges as possible for snow and ice, and rolling-resistance technology from the EcoContact 5. Tyrepress
• TS 860 (2016): "Cool Chili", a high-silica compound with resins that stay soft in the cold, plus "SnowCurve" block walls and drainage channels for ice. Tyrepress
• TS 870 (2021): a new compound with tuned crosslink density (how tightly the rubber is cured), about 10% more blocks in the contact patch and 3D interlocking sipes. Continental claimed +10% mileage. Tyrepress See WinterContact TS 860 vs TS 870.

Michelin Alpin and Dunlop Winter Sport: the zigzag lines

* Year of the first test; the launch year is not confirmed.

* Year of the first test; the launch year is not confirmed.

Michelin's Alpin went up and down: the original Alpin beat 88% of a typical field, the A2 and A3 less (82 and 85), the A4 (2010) 88, the Alpin 5 (2014) dropped to 84, the Alpin 6 rose to 93, the best of the line, and the Alpin 7 has 88 from its first 12 tests (Alpin 6 vs 7). Michelin said the A4 brought technology from its Nordic X-Ice North tire, with 10% more traction and 5% shorter braking on snow and ice than the A3. Tyrepress The A4 also had the best tread-life score of any winter tire here (100).

Dunlop's SP Winter Sport 3D (about 2005) was a big step from the M3 (71 → 91). Its "3D" sipes open at low speed for bite and lock together at speed for stiffness. Modern Tire Dealer The 4D (2011) added transverse sipes for 33% more biting edges and a compound with 11% lower rolling resistance Tyrepress, but rated lower (86) and lost tread life. The Winter Sport 5 (2015) recovered to 92 on the strength of wet and snow grip (Winter Sport 4D vs 5).

Michelin CrossClimate: inventing a category

The 2015 CrossClimate was sold as "a summer tire certified for winter": it carried the snowflake mark while braking like a summer tire. Automotive World The CrossClimate+ and CrossClimate 2 each rated higher, and the CrossClimate 2 shares the best snow score of the line with the CrossClimate 3 (99).

CrossClimate 3 vs CrossClimate 2

After 9 tests the CrossClimate 3 (2025) rates 88, against 94 for the CrossClimate 2 from 35 tests. It scores lower in the wet (81 against 84) and in the dry (84 against 100), matches it on snow and is about level on tread life so far (82 against 80). It has not won a test yet; the CrossClimate 2 won 6 of its 35. Michelin claims 4% better wet grip and 15% more life than the CC2. Michelin Give it a season of tests before judging, and see the two side by side.

What actually changed inside the tire

• Rubber chemistry got cleverer, not just stickier. Silica replaced carbon black in tread rubber through the 1990s and 2000s. Then came "functionalised" polymers that bond to the silica (Michelin's functional elastomers, Bridgestone's NanoPro-Tech and later ENLITEN), mixes of polymer chain lengths (Continental's Black Chili) and resins that keep rubber soft in the cold and sticky in the wet. This is how a tire gains wet grip and loses rolling resistance at the same time, the 2012–2018 pattern in the era table.
• Sipes went three-dimensional. Flat cuts let blocks squirm. Interlocking 3D sipes lock together under braking and cornering, which keeps winter tires stable on dry roads and lets them carry more sipe edges for snow and ice.
• The contact patch became adaptive. Goodyear's ActiveBraking (2011) set the pattern. A decade later the PremiumContact 7, SportContact 7 and Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 shape their footprint differently for braking, cornering and water.
• "Safe when worn" became a design goal. Michelin's Primacy 4 (2018) made it a selling point, and grooves that widen or open with wear followed. Since 2024, new tire types in the EU (UN Regulation 117, amendment 04) must also pass a wet-grip test when worn.
• EVs changed the brief. Since about 2020 almost every launch talks about weight, aerodynamic sidewalls, rolling resistance and noise. That partly explains why recent generations gained more in tread life than in grip.

When the new tire isn't better

About one change in three went backwards in our ratings. The causes fall into three groups:

• A deliberate trade. The Blizzak 6 and Pilot Sport 5 rated a little lower than the tires they replaced and the Turanza 6 clearly lower, but all three last clearly longer. The Alpin 7 cut rolling resistance by 9% against the test average, exactly the 9% Michelin claimed against the Alpin 6, while losing some grip.
• A design that didn't land. The Turanza T001 against the ER300, the Eagle F1 Asymmetric 3 against the Asymmetric 2, the Nokian WR Snowproof against the WR D4, the Alpin 5 against the A4 and the SP Winter Sport 4D against the 3D.
• Too early to tell. The Primacy 5, CrossClimate 3, Potenza Sport Evo and Alpin 7 have 6–12 tests each. A few results either way can still move them several points.

What this means when you buy

• The previous generation is often a smart buy when the step was small. A discounted PremiumContact 6 (field rating 95) or Primacy 4 (92) is still a top tire.
• Skip the old one when the step was a leap. Old stock of the Blizzak LM001, Potenza S001, Turanza T001 or Pilot Sport 3 is a real step down from its replacement.
• Read launch numbers carefully. Big percentages are usually measured against rivals, in one size, by a lab the maker paid. Gains over the predecessor are typically 2–8% in braking and 10–30% in tread life.
• Check the tests in your size. Every tire page on TireWheelGuide shows its road-test record and owner reviews: start from best tires by size.

Method notes

Data: 677 published tire tests from 2009 to 2026 in our database, from independent testers only, plus 68 ADAC tests from 2000–2016 read from the Internet Archive (where our database already held an ADAC test from 2016 or earlier with placings only, the archived version with grades replaced it). Comparison tires from another season are left out of the field.

Field rating. Each placing is turned into a normal score according to the size of the field. For the archived ADAC tests the placing is ranked from ADAC's category grades with its usual weights (summer: wet 40%, dry 20%, wear 20%, noise 10%, fuel 10%); this matches ADAC's own verdicts closely up to 2011, while from 2012 ADAC let a tire's weakest category set its final grade. We fit a tire strength and a test strength by least squares, with a mild pull toward the average for tires with little evidence. Every test counts the same whatever its age, because this is history, not a buying guide (see How we measured progress for how this differs from the TWG score).

Road-test scores. The same model run on each measured result (metres, seconds, decibels, kilometres) and each tester's grade, read on its own test's scale, and rescaled so the average tested tire scores 70. A dash means fewer than two tests carried that category. The era table takes the median change over every step where both tires have the score.

Claims. The technology notes and manufacturer figures come from the makers' press releases and trade press, linked in each section. They are the makers' own measurements, mostly in one size.