Tests – · none yet Owners – · none yet
BFGoodrich Advantage T/A Sport LT vs Pirelli Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico — Compared
Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews (comfort 40/60). Based on 0 + 0 road tests and 0 + 21 owner reviews. How we score
Add your size for an exact match
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests – · none yet Owners 48 · 21 reviews
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
–
Dry
No comparison58Why this score
Source Advantage T/A Sport LT Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico Professional tests (TWG score) – ≈ 62 (est.) Reviews found online – 53 Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico: 60% × 61.6 (est.) + 40% × 52.7 = 58
No road tests of dry for Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.42).
-
–
Wet
No comparison56Why this score
Source Advantage T/A Sport LT Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico Professional tests (TWG score) – ≈ 59 (est.) Reviews found online – 50 Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico: 60% × 59.4 (est.) + 40% × 50.3 = 56
No road tests of wet for Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
-
–
Snow
No comparison56Why this score
Source Advantage T/A Sport LT Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico Professional tests (TWG score) – ≈ 62 (est.) Reviews found online – 47 Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico: 60% × 61.8 (est.) + 40% × 46.8 = 56
No road tests of snow for Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.37).
-
–
Comfort
No comparison55Why this score
Source Advantage T/A Sport LT Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico Professional tests (TWG score) – ≈ 65 (est.) Reviews found online – 48 Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico: 40% × 65.2 (est.) + 60% × 47.8 = 55
No road tests of comfort for Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
–
Noise
No comparison59Why this score
Source Advantage T/A Sport LT Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico Professional tests (TWG score) – ≈ 67 (est.) Reviews found online – 47 Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico: 60% × 66.6 (est.) + 40% × 47.3 = 59
No road tests of noise for Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico. The test half is the tested tires’ average (67): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
–
Treadwear
No comparison50Why this score
Source Advantage T/A Sport LT Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico Professional tests (TWG score) – ≈ 57 (est.) Reviews found online – 39 Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico: 60% × 56.8 (est.) + 40% × 39.4 = 50
No road tests of treadwear for Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.35).
-
–
Handling (owners)
No comparison53Why this score
Source Advantage T/A Sport LT Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico Reviews found online – 53
Scores at a glance
| Category | BFGoodrich Advantage T/A Sport LT | Pirelli Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | – | 56 |
| Dry | – | 58 |
| Wet | – | 56 |
| Snow | – | 56 |
| Comfort | – | 55 |
| Noise | – | 59 |
| Treadwear | – | 50 |
| Handling (owners) | – | 53 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip starts at “Important”. Treadwear starts at “Neutral” here: road tests measured it for at most one of the two tires, so it rests on owner reviews. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Advantage T/A Sport LT
Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico
Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A Advantage T/A Sport LT
Not enough owner reviews yet to extract themes.
Tire B Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico
Pros
- Strong dry-road grip and handling performance
- Capably handles light snow and winter conditions for an all-season tire
- Favorable tread wear and longevity reported by some high-mileage users
Cons
- Significantly compromised wet-weather traction and high risk of aquaplaning
- Poor grip and understeer/oversteer tendencies in cold or damp temperatures below 15°C
- Excessive road noise and a harsh, stiff ride reported by multiple drivers
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · BFGoodrich Advantage T/A Sport LT | B · Pirelli Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico |
|---|---|---|
| Category | All-Season tire | All Season |
| Vehicle type | SUV and 4x4 | SUV and 4x4 |
| Sizes available | 1 | 19 |
| Rim diameters | 16″ | 18″ – 28″ |
| Tread depth | 10 - 11/32″ | 10/32″ |
| UTQG | 660 - 740 B A | 420 A A |
| Sidewall | Black Side Wall | Blackwall |
| Max pressure | 44 - 50 psi | 50 psi |
Which one should you actually buy?
BFGoodrich Advantage T/A Sport LT
Pirelli Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico
Only Pirelli Scorpion Zero Asimmetrico has enough test and review data for a Relative Score, so there is no head-to-head winner yet.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
How do we compare tires?
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements), each result compared with every other tire in the same test and newer tests counting more. 40% comes from owner reviews found online, adjusted for how generously each site rates. Both use one scale: the average tested tire gets 70, the best 100. When a tire has only one of the two, the missing half is estimated from the other and the score stays closer to average; with no road test and fewer than five owner reviews it gets no score yet.
Handling is the exception: road tests measure it inside the dry and wet scores, so its own row comes from owner ratings only and starts as less important.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score. Full methodology