Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews (comfort 40/60). Based on 3 + 0 road tests and 3,151 + 81 owner reviews. How we score
N Fera SU4 is ahead, 78–67
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests 73 · 3 tests Owners 59 · 3,151 reviews
Best test result: #1 of 8 in 2020 Gute Fahrt SUV Summer Tyre Test (dry braking)
“In the end I went with Bridgestone Potenza RE 050's Very happy. Grips as well as the Conti Sport5's without disintegrating after a few hard mountain passes. On a light car sport contact5's, For a heavier car RE 050's are fantastic completely sold. Pilot Sports are far too soft these cars.”
Tests – · none yet Owners 81 · 81 reviews
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
| Source | Sport Contact 5 | N Fera SU4 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 3 / – tests | 76 | ≈ 75 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 70 | 85 |
Sport Contact 5: 60% × 76.2 + 40% × 69.6 = 74
N Fera SU4: 60% × 74.8 (est.) + 40% × 84.6 = 79
No road tests of dry for N Fera SU4. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).
| Source | Sport Contact 5 | N Fera SU4 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 3 / – tests | 75 | ≈ 79 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 72 | 86 |
Sport Contact 5: 60% × 74.6 + 40% × 72 = 74
N Fera SU4: 60% × 78.9 (est.) + 40% × 85.7 = 82
No road tests of wet for N Fera SU4. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
| Source | Sport Contact 5 | N Fera SU4 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / – tests | 61 | ≈ 71 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 60 | 80 |
Sport Contact 5: 40% × 61.3 + 60% × 60.4 = 61
N Fera SU4: 40% × 70.9 (est.) + 60% × 79.7 = 76
No road tests of comfort for N Fera SU4. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
| Source | Sport Contact 5 | N Fera SU4 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 2 / – tests | 66 | – |
| Reviews found online | ≈ 66 (est.) | – |
Sport Contact 5: 60% × 66.3 + 40% × 66.4 (est.) = 66
No owner ratings of noise for Sport Contact 5. The owner half is the owners’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests, so the tests say nothing about how owners would rate it.
| Source | Sport Contact 5 | N Fera SU4 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | ≈ 55 (est.) | ≈ 69 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 34 | 74 |
Sport Contact 5: 60% × 54.9 (est.) + 40% × 34.4 = 47
N Fera SU4: 60% × 69.2 (est.) + 40% × 73.9 = 71
No road tests of treadwear for Sport Contact 5. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
No road tests of treadwear for N Fera SU4. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
| Source | Sport Contact 5 | N Fera SU4 |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews found online | 66 | 79 |
| Source | Sport Contact 5 | N Fera SU4 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 2 / – tests | 74 | – |
| Category | Continental Sport Contact 5 | Nexen N Fera SU4 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 67 | 78 |
| Dry | 74 | 79 |
| Wet | 74 | 82 |
| Comfort | 61 | 76 |
| Noise | 66 | – |
| Treadwear | 47 | 71 |
| Handling (owners) | 66 | 79 |
| Efficiency | 74 | – |
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.
Sport Contact 5
N Fera SU4
Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.
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 Sport Contact 5 highlights strong grip and effective braking in both wet and dry conditions, along with good cornering feel. However, opinions are mixed regarding treadwear and durability, with multiple users raising concerns over rapid tire wear and degradation under heavy loads or spirited driving. While some drivers prefer them over competing models, others view them as inferior to subsequent Continental generations or rival brands.
“I've just had a set of these Continental Sport Contact 5 fitted to my car and I'm quite impressed with them. They seem to be really good in the wet, stopping distances were notable shorter, more so than I'd expect with the extra tread depth. They are also really good in the dry and give a nice "feel" on tight corners. They have replaced the Eagle F1's in my mind as the best day to day tyre. Anyone else had them fitted?”
“I run Accelera PHI2's on my 20's and have done for the last 3-4 years with absolutely no problems. I'm a biker and like to press on in all my vehicles. Never had a scary moment in the van in any weather and drive just as fast in that as I do the car (conti sport contact 5's on that). Only cover about 6K in the van per year so don't want anything that lasts too long as it would deteriorate before it was anywhere near worn out. Mike likes banging on about Michelins but they can have problems as well as anything else. Michelin Agilis 51's had problems with bulges and tyre failures in the past. Other michelin tyre problems (I know how much Mike likes Yankee sites!) And Michelin have tyre factories all over the world including India and Asia. Not all cheaper tyres are bad tyres. Pirelli P6000 were notoriously bad for example, and Pirelli are not classed as a budget tyre. Mike will still bang on like a broken record though about VW and 16 and 17 inch tyres though. Its probably an old age thing”
“Quote: Originally Posted by bret In the end I went with Bridgestone Potenza RE 050's Very happy. Grips as well as the Conti Sport5's without disintegrating after a few hard mountain passes. On a light car sport contact5's, For a heavier car RE 050's are fantastic completely sold. Pilot Sports are far too soft these cars. Back in the day I had numerous sets of Potenza's on a Saab 900 Turbo...that's been a good tire for a long long time. Check out the Cooper Zeon when you get a chance, heckuva tire at any price.”
Based on 14 community posts
We haven't collected enough community discussion about this tire yet.
| Attribute | A · Continental Sport Contact 5 | B · Nexen N Fera SU4 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | 84 | — |
| Rim diameters | 17″ – 22″ | — |
| UTQG | 280 - 420 A - AA A | — |
Continental Sport Contact 5
Nexen N Fera SU4
Winner: Nexen N Fera SU4 — better treadwear, comfort and handling. It leads or ties in every category we score.
Nexen N Fera SU4 scores 71 vs 47 on treadwear.
Nexen N Fera SU4 scores 76 vs 61 on comfort.
Nexen N Fera SU4 scores 79 vs 66 on handling.
Nexen N Fera SU4 scores 82 vs 74 on wet.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Nexen N Fera SU4, 82 vs 74 on our wet score.
Nexen N Fera SU4, 79 vs 74 on our dry score.
Nexen N Fera SU4, 76 vs 61 on our comfort score.
Nexen N Fera SU4, 71 vs 47 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
