tirewheelguide
Head-to-head Updated

BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A vs Continental ContiVanContact 200 — 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 19 + 9 owner reviews. How we score

Urban Terrain T/A is ahead, 75–53

Check price on Amazon · Urban Terrain T/A or ContiVanContact 200 on Amazon
Add your size for an exact match
/R

Both Amazon links then search this exact size.

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

Category by category

Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.

  1. 74

    Dry

    Urban Terrain T/A +18
    56
    Why this score
    SourceUrban Terrain T/AContiVanContact 200
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 72 (est.)≈ 60 (est.)
    Reviews found online7749

    Urban Terrain T/A: 60% × 71.9 (est.) + 40% × 77.2 = 74

    ContiVanContact 200: 60% × 60.1 (est.) + 40% × 49.1 = 56

    No road tests of dry for Urban Terrain T/A. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.42).

    No road tests of dry for ContiVanContact 200. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.42).

  2. 76

    Wet

    Urban Terrain T/A +19
    57
    Why this score
    SourceUrban Terrain T/AContiVanContact 200
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 75 (est.)≈ 60 (est.)
    Reviews found online7852

    Urban Terrain T/A: 60% × 74.7 (est.) + 40% × 77.9 = 76

    ContiVanContact 200: 60% × 60.1 (est.) + 40% × 51.5 = 57

    No road tests of wet for Urban Terrain T/A. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).

    No road tests of wet for ContiVanContact 200. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).

  3. 69

    Snow

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceUrban Terrain T/AContiVanContact 200
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 70 (est.)–
    Reviews found online68–

    Urban Terrain T/A: 60% × 69.8 (est.) + 40% × 68.1 = 69

    No road tests of snow for Urban Terrain T/A. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.37).

  4. 73

    Comfort

    Urban Terrain T/A +19
    54
    Why this score
    SourceUrban Terrain T/AContiVanContact 200
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 70 (est.)≈ 65 (est.)
    Reviews found online7547

    Urban Terrain T/A: 40% × 70.2 (est.) + 60% × 74.8 = 73

    ContiVanContact 200: 40% × 65.1 (est.) + 60% × 47.4 = 54

    No road tests of comfort for Urban Terrain T/A or ContiVanContact 200. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.

  5. 74

    Treadwear

    Urban Terrain T/A +33
    41
    Why this score
    SourceUrban Terrain T/AContiVanContact 200
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 70 (est.)≈ 52 (est.)
    Reviews found online7925

    Urban Terrain T/A: 60% × 70.4 (est.) + 40% × 78.5 = 74

    ContiVanContact 200: 60% × 51.7 (est.) + 40% × 24.6 = 41

    No road tests of treadwear for Urban Terrain T/A. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.35).

    No road tests of treadwear for ContiVanContact 200. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.35).

  6. 74

    Handling (owners)

    Urban Terrain T/A +21
    53
    Why this score
    SourceUrban Terrain T/AContiVanContact 200
    Reviews found online7453
Scores at a glance
CategoryBFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/AContinental ContiVanContact 200
Relative Score 75 53
Dry 74 56
Wet 76 57
Snow 69 –
Comfort 73 54
Treadwear 74 41
Handling (owners) 74 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.

Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Recomputed
Headline score
± 8

Urban Terrain T/A

± 8

ContiVanContact 200

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 Urban Terrain T/A

Pros

  • Exceptional tread life and durability across various vehicle types.
  • Strong traction and confidence in winter conditions, including snow and slush.
  • Reliable off-road capability on loose surfaces like mud, wet grass, and gravel.

Cons

  • Higher levels of road noise compared to standard highway or OEM tires.
  • Noticeable impact on fuel efficiency for some users.
  • Not intended for high-speed, performance-oriented driving.
All owner themes in the Urban Terrain T/A review

Tire B ContiVanContact 200

Pros

  • Strong initial grip and handling performance in both wet and dry conditions
  • Comfortable ride quality
  • Acceptable fuel efficiency

Cons

  • Rapid and premature tread wear
  • Significant loss of wet-weather traction as the tread depth decreases
  • Pronounced uneven wear patterns, specifically scalloping and outer-edge degradation
All owner themes in the ContiVanContact 200 review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A B · Continental ContiVanContact 200
CategoryAll SeasonSummer
Vehicle typePassenger Car / CrossoverVan
Sizes available1816
Rim diameters15″ – 18″15″ – 17″
Sizes in common33

Which one should you actually buy?

BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A

Continental ContiVanContact 200

Winner: BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A — better treadwear, handling and wet. It leads or ties in every category we score. BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 19 reviews), so read this result as provisional. Continental ContiVanContact 200 rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 9 reviews), so read this result as provisional.

Pick tire A You want the longest tread life

BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A scores 74 vs 41 on treadwear.

Pick tire A You enjoy sharp, responsive handling

BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A scores 74 vs 53 on handling.

Pick tire A Your priority is wet-weather safety

BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A scores 76 vs 57 on wet.

Pick tire A You want the most comfortable ride

BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A scores 73 vs 54 on comfort.

Tire A · BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · Continental ContiVanContact 200
Check price on Amazon

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

Urban Terrain T/A or ContiVanContact 200?

Which is better in the wet, Urban Terrain T/A or ContiVanContact 200?

BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A, 76 vs 57 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, Urban Terrain T/A or ContiVanContact 200?

BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A, 74 vs 56 on our dry score.

Which is more comfortable, Urban Terrain T/A or ContiVanContact 200?

BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A, 73 vs 54 on our comfort score.

Which lasts longer, Urban Terrain T/A or ContiVanContact 200?

BFGoodrich Urban Terrain T/A, 74 vs 41 on our treadwear score.

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