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 + 1 road tests and 202 + 76 owner reviews. How we score
Too close to call: Premium Contact 2 and S.drive are level at 64.
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests – · none yet Owners 59 · 202 reviews
“These tires are directional, right? If so, make sure they're all installed in the right direction. A friend of mine recently had the exact problem you describe. After thinking it might be shocks, tire pressure, etc. we noticed that one of the tires was installed by the tire shop so it rotated in the wrong direction.”
Tests – · 1 test Owners 57 · 76 reviews
Best test result: #6 of 22 in 2022 Consumer Reports Ultra High Performance Summer Tires (tested tread life (miles))
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
| Source | Premium Contact 2 | S.drive |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | ≈ 67 (est.) | ≈ 67 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 65 | 65 |
Premium Contact 2: 60% × 66.6 (est.) + 40% × 64.6 = 66
S.drive: 60% × 66.5 (est.) + 40% × 64.5 = 66
No road tests of dry for Premium Contact 2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).
No road tests of dry for S.drive. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).
| Source | Premium Contact 2 | S.drive |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | ≈ 69 (est.) | ≈ 64 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 67 | 59 |
Premium Contact 2: 60% × 68.6 (est.) + 40% × 66.8 = 68
S.drive: 60% × 64.1 (est.) + 40% × 58.7 = 62
No road tests of wet for Premium Contact 2. 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 S.drive. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
| Source | Premium Contact 2 | S.drive |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | ≈ 60 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | – | 36 |
S.drive: 60% × 59.7 (est.) + 40% × 36.3 = 50
No road tests of snow for S.drive. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).
| Source | Premium Contact 2 | S.drive |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | ≈ 67 (est.) | ≈ 66 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 59 | 55 |
Premium Contact 2: 40% × 66.7 (est.) + 60% × 58.5 = 62
S.drive: 40% × 65.8 (est.) + 60% × 54.5 = 59
No road tests of comfort for Premium Contact 2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
No road tests of comfort for S.drive. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
| Source | Premium Contact 2 | S.drive |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | ≈ 66 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | – | 59 |
S.drive: 60% × 66.3 (est.) + 40% × 59.1 = 63
No road tests of noise for S.drive. The test half is the tested tires’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.
| Source | Premium Contact 2 | S.drive |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests | ≈ 59 (est.) | 70 |
| Reviews found online | 46 | 58 |
Premium Contact 2: 60% × 59.2 (est.) + 40% × 46 = 54
S.drive: 60% × 70.2 + 40% × 58.4 = 65
No road tests of treadwear for Premium Contact 2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
| Source | Premium Contact 2 | S.drive |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews found online | 61 | 63 |
| Category | Continental Premium Contact 2 | Yokohama S.drive |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 64 | 64 |
| Dry | 66 | 66 |
| Wet | 68 | 62 |
| Snow | – | 50 |
| Comfort | 62 | 59 |
| Noise | – | 63 |
| Treadwear | 54 | 65 |
| Handling (owners) | 61 | 63 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
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.
Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.
Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.
Premium Contact 2
S.drive
Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.
Per discipline: the average % of the best tire over every test both tires were in, and how many of those tests each one won. “Different tests” rows compare results from separate tests.
| Discipline | Category | Premium Contact 2 | S.drive | Δ | Head-to-head |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Also published by the testers (not in the score) | |||||
| Overall Ranking | Overall | #8/9 2012 EVO Winter Tyre Test | #18/22 2022 Consumer Reports Ultra High Performance Summer Tires | – | Different tests |
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
From Reddit, forums and review threads. Not part of our score
Community feedback on the Continental Premium Contact 2 presents a mixed perspective, with some users highlighting poor treadwear and wet traction across Continental sets, while others appreciate its value pricing and OEM status. Discussions frequently focus on pricing versus competitors like Michelin PP2, sizing, asymmetric mounting requirements, and break-in behavior.
“Quote: Originally Posted by reignofchaos Rudra if you are looking for PP2s in 205/60 R15, I'd say look for other options. After switching to 205/55 R15 Advan Neovas, I can say for sure that the PP2s make the steering feel way heavier than it ought to be and it also slowed down the car. For a while I thought it was stability, but now I feel that its just an unwanted effect. Most people complain about advans slowing them down, I'm actually relishing the fact that my car actually feels faster with them than before. PP2s grip really well in the straight line but their lateral grip is no way close to the Advans. Nor is the wet weather performance, nor is ride comfort. I'm not kidding - I'm finding 205/55 R15 Advans way more comfortable than 205/60 R15 PP2s. Plus PP2s wore out quite soon for me - roughly 30k or so. Given your style of driving, I wouldnt be surprised if the Advans last 10k! :”
“Re: directional Behaviour now greatly improved since tyres have bedded in, handling feels as it used to. Tried differing pressures but eventually ended up as per the book and previous tyre sets at 28 front 34 rears. Thanks for the warning about directional fitting, they are clearly marked and profiled for outside edge and fitted accordingly but I do not think they are directional. Just need rebalancing now they have settled.”
“Quote: Originally Posted by Rudra Sen Hmm, so they can be a proper substitute if one doesn't get PP2 fresh stock? Rudra if you are looking for PP2s in 205/60 R15, I'd say look for other options. After switching to 205/55 R15 Advan Neovas, I can say for sure that the PP2s make the steering feel way heavier than it ought to be and it also slowed down the car. For a while I thought it was stability, but now I feel that its just an unwanted effect. Most people complain about advans slowing them down, I'm actually relishing the fact that my car actually feels faster with them than before. PP2s grip really well in the straight line but their lateral grip is no way close to the Advans. Nor is the wet weather performance, nor is ride comfort. I'm not kidding - I'm finding 205/55 R15 Advans way more comfortable than 205/60 R15 PP2s. Plus PP2s wore out quite soon for me - roughly 30k or so.”
Based on 11 community posts
We haven't collected enough community discussion about this tire yet.
| Attribute | A · Continental Premium Contact 2 | B · Yokohama S.drive |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | 38 | 1 |
| Rim diameters | 14″ – 18″ | 17″ |
| Tread depth | — | 10/32″ |
| UTQG | 280 AA A | 300 A A |
| Sidewall | — | Blackwall |
| Max pressure | — | 51 psi |
Continental Premium Contact 2
Yokohama S.drive
Too close to call: Continental Premium Contact 2 and Yokohama S.drive are within 2 points overall. Continental Premium Contact 2 is stronger on wet and comfort. Yokohama S.drive is stronger on treadwear.
Yokohama S.drive scores 65 vs 54 on treadwear.
Continental Premium Contact 2 scores 68 vs 62 on wet.
Continental Premium Contact 2 scores 62 vs 59 on comfort.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Continental Premium Contact 2, 68 vs 62 on our wet score.
Neither, by our numbers: 66 vs 66 on the dry score, within 3 points.
Continental Premium Contact 2, 62 vs 59 on our comfort score.
Yokohama S.drive, 65 vs 54 on our treadwear score.
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
