Tests – · none yet Owners 52 · 121 reviews
Hankook Ventus V12 evo K110 looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.
Head-to-head
Updated
Hankook Ventus V12 evo K110 vs Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 — 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 + 4 road tests and 121 + 2,201 owner reviews. How we score
ADVAN Fleva V701 is ahead, 65–58
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.
Tests 73 · 4 tests Owners 57 · 2,201 reviews
Best test result: #2 of 22 in 2022 Consumer Reports Ultra High Performance Summer Tires (tested tread life (miles))
“I just got the Yokohama Advan Fleva V701's and I like them a lot. The turn in is quicker and the feel is better than the Indy 500's that I had before. They feel more solid and less vague.The sidewall seems a bit stiffer, but somehow the ride is not as harsh.”
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
60
Dry
ADVAN Fleva V701 +1474Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo K110 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 3 tests ≈ 63 (est.) 78 Reviews found online 56 68 Ventus V12 evo K110: 60% × 62.8 (est.) + 40% × 55.6 = 60
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 77.7 + 40% × 67.7 = 74
No road tests of dry for Ventus V12 evo K110. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.42).
-
60
Wet
ADVAN Fleva V701 +767Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo K110 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 3 tests ≈ 62 (est.) 70 Reviews found online 56 64 Ventus V12 evo K110: 60% × 62.4 (est.) + 40% × 55.5 = 60
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 70 + 40% × 63.7 = 67
No road tests of wet for Ventus V12 evo K110. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
-
50
Snow
Ventus V12 evo K110 +1436Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo K110 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 59 (est.) ≈ 52 (est.) Reviews found online 35 12 Ventus V12 evo K110: 60% × 59.4 (est.) + 40% × 35.1 = 50
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 52.2 (est.) + 40% × 12.4 = 36
No road tests of snow for Ventus V12 evo K110. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).
No road tests of snow for ADVAN Fleva V701. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).
-
60
Comfort
ADVAN Fleva V701 +161Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo K110 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests ≈ 66 (est.) 62 Reviews found online 56 61 Ventus V12 evo K110: 40% × 66.1 (est.) + 60% × 55.7 = 60
ADVAN Fleva V701: 40% × 62.4 + 60% × 60.9 = 61
No road tests of comfort for Ventus V12 evo K110. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
-
60
Noise
ADVAN Fleva V701 +868Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo K110 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests ≈ 66 (est.) 74 Reviews found online 52 60 Ventus V12 evo K110: 60% × 66.3 (est.) + 40% × 51.6 = 60
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 74.4 + 40% × 59.6 = 68
No road tests of noise for Ventus V12 evo K110. The test half is the tested tires’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
57
Treadwear
ADVAN Fleva V701 +1269Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo K110 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 3 tests ≈ 61 (est.) 75 Reviews found online 51 59 Ventus V12 evo K110: 60% × 61 (est.) + 40% × 51 = 57
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 75.2 + 40% × 59.3 = 69
No road tests of treadwear for Ventus V12 evo K110. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
-
63
Handling (owners)
ADVAN Fleva V701 +972Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo K110 ADVAN Fleva V701 Reviews found online 63 72 -
–
Efficiency
No comparison71Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo K110 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests – 71
Scores at a glance
| Category | Hankook Ventus V12 evo K110 | Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 58 | 65 |
| Dry | 60 | 74 |
| Wet | 60 | 67 |
| Snow | 50 | 36 |
| Comfort | 60 | 61 |
| Noise | 60 | 68 |
| Treadwear | 57 | 69 |
| Handling (owners) | 63 | 72 |
| Efficiency | – | 71 |
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
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Not important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.
Recomputed
Headline score
58
/ 100
Ventus V12 evo K110
65
/ 100
ADVAN Fleva V701
Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.
The professional test results behind the scores
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 | Ventus V12 evo K110 | ADVAN Fleva V701 | Δ | Head-to-head |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Also published by the testers (not in the score) | |||||
| Overall Ranking | Overall | #5/9 2013 Auto Review Performance Summer Tyre Test | #6/22 2022 Consumer Reports Ultra High Performance Summer Tires | – | Different tests |
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A Ventus V12 evo K110
Pros
- Exceptional value for money compared to premium brand alternatives
- Strong, confident dry grip and handling performance
- Low road noise and high comfort levels
Cons
- Soft sidewalls can lead to reduced steering feedback and a squirmy feel
- Faster-than-average tread wear
- Subpar wet weather traction and increased risk of aquaplaning as tread wears down
Tire B ADVAN Fleva V701
Pros
- Exceptional dry and wet grip for the price point
- Noticeably quieter and more comfortable than many competing UHP tires
- Precise steering response and good road feedback
Cons
- Faster-than-average tread wear reported by aggressive drivers
- Some complaints regarding soft sidewalls leading to initial turn-in delay or tramlining
- Occasional reports of elevated road noise depending on the vehicle and road surface
What real owners are saying
From Reddit, forums and review threads. Not part of our score
Tire A
Hankook Ventus V12 evo K110
We haven't collected enough community discussion about this tire yet.
Tire B
Mixed
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701
Most posts are people asking whether the V701 suits daily driving, spirited road use, or autocross. They see it as an affordable, grippy summer or performance all-season tire, and the few firsthand comments are positive: quicker turn-in, a better feel, and a stiffer sidewall without a harsher ride. Open concerns are tread life (one mechanic said it wears quickly), wet performance, and how it compares with the Michelin Pilot Sport 5 and the Falken 615K+.
fiestastforum.com
·2022-11-30
“I just got the Yokohama Advan Fleva V701's and I like them a lot. The turn in is quicker and the feel is better than the Indy 500's that I had before. They feel more solid and less vague.The sidewall seems a bit stiffer, but somehow the ride is not as harsh.”
r/Civic_Type_R
·3 upvotes ·2026-09-05
“Suggestiona on tyres Hi everyone, Just wanted to ask if you guys ever had Yokohama Advan Fleva V701. My FK2 has nearly 400bhp and I’m not using it daily anymore as I want it to preserve the baby. My drive is a bit aggressive occasionally but nothing crazy or track day as I don’t have the time. I would like to know if you guys ever had this specific type of tyre. What you think about? They’re actually good? I wouldn’t like to buy again the Michelin pilot sport 4s which I found absolutely rubbish. I found those yoko for the decent price of 98£ each. So I buy it or should I move to Pirelli PZero pZ4 sport ?”
alltrac.net
·2025-04-09
“Online reviews in general are such a crapshoot. So many times you see products with diametrically opposed opinions. It's tough to sift through to figure out what may be true for your own application/situation. I'm sure part of the reason less people buy the Vredestein is brand recognition. Like underscore...I would say I've never heard of them...other than that I have seen their brand as I've been looking for tires to go on my 15" OZ rally wheels. They had a tire in an uncommon 215-50-15. Since you have first hand experience that is positive, that's probably worth more than 99% of online reviews. I'll probably go with Yokohama Advan Fleva v701 in 205-55-15 eventually. I've seen glowing reviews for them and reviews that say they are garbage. I'd like to get Yokohama Advan HF Type-D for their period correctness, and because I just think they look cool ( and isn't that what's most important in a tire? ) ...but they are difficult to get in the States. Well, maybe not difficult, just costly. When I looked on Nengun, it was about $650 for shipping on a set of 4. Most UK & European suppliers I've found won't even ship them to the US. But I'm getting way off topic here.”
Top themes
#Daily driving suitability#Tread life concerns#Value for price#Grip and handling#Wet performance#Turn-in and feel#Miata and Honda fitments#Alternatives comparison
Based on 23 community posts
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Hankook Ventus V12 evo K110 | B · Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | — | 70 |
| Rim diameters | — | 15″ – 20″ |
| Tread depth | 10/32″ | 9/32″ |
| UTQG | 280 A A | 300 A A |
| Sidewall | Blackwall | Blackwall |
| Max pressure | 50 psi | 51 psi |
Which one should you actually buy?
58
/ 100
Hankook Ventus V12 evo K110
65
/ 100
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701
Winner: Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 — better dry, treadwear and handling. Pick the Hankook Ventus V12 evo K110 if snow matters most to you.
Pick tire A
You drive through snowy winters
Hankook Ventus V12 evo K110 scores 50 vs 36 on snow.
Pick tire B
You want the most grip on dry roads
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 scores 74 vs 60 on dry.
Pick tire B
You want the longest tread life
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 scores 69 vs 57 on treadwear.
Pick tire B
You enjoy sharp, responsive handling
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 scores 72 vs 63 on handling.
Tire A · Hankook Ventus V12 evo K110
Tire B · Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Ventus V12 evo K110 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Which is better in the wet, Ventus V12 evo K110 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701, 67 vs 60 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Ventus V12 evo K110 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701, 74 vs 60 on our dry score.
Which is better in snow, Ventus V12 evo K110 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Hankook Ventus V12 evo K110, 50 vs 36 on our snow score.
Which is quieter, Ventus V12 evo K110 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701, 68 vs 60 on our noise score.
Which is more comfortable, Ventus V12 evo K110 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Neither, by our numbers: 60 vs 61 on the comfort score, within 3 points.
Which lasts longer, Ventus V12 evo K110 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701, 69 vs 57 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