Tests 71 · 1 test Owners 68 · 93 reviews
Head-to-head
Updated
Hankook Ventus V12 evo2 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 1 + 4 road tests and 93 + 2,189 owner reviews. How we score
Too close to call: Ventus V12 evo2 69, ADVAN Fleva V701 70.
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 · 2,189 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.
-
71
Dry
ADVAN Fleva V701 +374Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo2 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / 3 tests 71 78 Reviews found online 71 67 Ventus V12 evo2: 60% × 70.9 + 40% × 71.4 = 71
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 77.7 + 40% × 67.3 = 74
-
71
Wet
Ventus V12 evo2 +368Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo2 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / 3 tests 69 70 Reviews found online 73 64 Ventus V12 evo2: 60% × 69.2 + 40% × 73.2 = 71
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 70 + 40% × 64 = 68
-
–
Snow
No comparison35Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo2 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) – ≈ 49 (est.) Reviews found online – 13 ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 49.1 (est.) + 40% × 12.7 = 35
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 0.37).
-
67
Comfort
Ventus V12 evo2 +562Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo2 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests ≈ 68 (est.) 62 Reviews found online 66 62 Ventus V12 evo2: 40% × 68.5 (est.) + 60% × 65.6 = 67
ADVAN Fleva V701: 40% × 62.5 + 60% × 61.5 = 62
No road tests of comfort for Ventus V12 evo2. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
73
Noise
Ventus V12 evo2 +469Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo2 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / 1 tests 78 75 Reviews found online ≈ 67 (est.) 60 Ventus V12 evo2: 60% × 77.5 + 40% × 66.6 (est.) = 73
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 74.8 + 40% × 60.1 = 69
No owner ratings of noise for Ventus V12 evo2. The owner half is the owners’ average (67): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests, so the tests say nothing about how owners would rate it.
-
61
Treadwear
ADVAN Fleva V701 +869Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo2 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 3 tests ≈ 63 (est.) 75 Reviews found online 58 59 Ventus V12 evo2: 60% × 63.4 (est.) + 40% × 58.4 = 61
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 75.3 + 40% × 59.4 = 69
No road tests of treadwear for Ventus V12 evo2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.35).
-
70
Handling (owners)
ADVAN Fleva V701 +272Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo2 ADVAN Fleva V701 Reviews found online 70 72 -
–
Efficiency
No comparison71Why this score
Source Ventus V12 evo2 ADVAN Fleva V701 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests – 71
Scores at a glance
| Category | Hankook Ventus V12 evo2 | Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 69 | 70 |
| Dry | 71 | 74 |
| Wet | 71 | 68 |
| Snow | – | 35 |
| Comfort | 67 | 62 |
| Noise | 73 | 69 |
| Treadwear | 61 | 69 |
| Handling (owners) | 70 | 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
Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.
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
69
/ 100
Ventus V12 evo2
70
/ 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 evo2 | ADVAN Fleva V701 | Δ | Head-to-head |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Braking | Dry | 97% #4/5 · 2017 Car and Driver UHP Tyre Test | 97% #8/45 · 2019 Summer 53 Tyre Braking Shootout | – | Different tests |
| Dry Handling | Dry | 97% #4/5 · 2017 Car and Driver UHP Tyre Test | 98% #14/20 · 2019 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Wet Braking | Wet | 88% #4/5 · 2017 Car and Driver UHP Tyre Test | 87% #21/45 · 2019 Summer 53 Tyre Braking Shootout | – | Different tests |
| Wet Handling | Wet | 95% #4/5 · 2017 Car and Driver UHP Tyre Test | 95% #16/20 · 2019 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Noise | Noise | 100% #1/5 · 2017 Car and Driver UHP Tyre Test | 100% #2/20 · 2019 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Also published by the testers (not in the score) | |||||
| Overall Ranking | Overall | #4/5 2017 Car and Driver UHP 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 evo2
Pros
- Excellent value and cost-to-performance ratio compared to premium brands
- Strong, reliable grip in both dry and wet conditions with good aquaplaning resistance
- Comfortable ride with low initial road noise
Cons
- Soft sidewalls can cause a floaty feel or roll during aggressive cornering and track use
- Road noise increases noticeably as the tires wear down
- Treadwear is relatively fast, leading to shorter overall mileage
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 evo2
We haven't collected enough community discussion about this tire yet.
Tire B
Positive
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701
The community generally views the Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 as a strong, high-value summer tire ideal for daily driving, spirited backroad runs, and wet weather conditions. Drivers praise its sharp turn-in, stiff sidewalls, and dependable grip compared to other budget or mid-tier alternatives, though some debate its lifespan and how it stacks up against premium options like Michelin.
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 comfort#Wet and dry grip#Spirited backroad handling#Value for money#Tire wear and lifespan#Sidewall stiffness
Based on 22 community posts
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Hankook Ventus V12 evo2 | B · Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | 38 | 70 |
| Rim diameters | 15″ – 21″ | 15″ – 20″ |
| Tread depth | — | 9/32″ |
| UTQG | — | 300 A A |
| Sidewall | — | Blackwall |
| Max pressure | — | 51 psi |
| Sizes in common | 29 | 29 |
Which one should you actually buy?
69
/ 100
Hankook Ventus V12 evo2
70
/ 100
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701
Too close to call: Hankook Ventus V12 evo2 and Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 are within 2 points overall. Hankook Ventus V12 evo2 is stronger on comfort, noise and wet. Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 is stronger on treadwear and dry.
Pick tire B
You want the longest tread life
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 scores 69 vs 61 on treadwear.
Pick tire A
You want the most comfortable ride
Hankook Ventus V12 evo2 scores 67 vs 62 on comfort.
Pick tire A
You want a quieter cabin
Hankook Ventus V12 evo2 scores 73 vs 69 on noise.
Pick tire A
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Hankook Ventus V12 evo2 scores 71 vs 68 on wet.
Tire A · Hankook Ventus V12 evo2
Tire B · Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Ventus V12 evo2 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Which is better in the wet, Ventus V12 evo2 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Hankook Ventus V12 evo2, 71 vs 68 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Ventus V12 evo2 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701, 74 vs 71 on our dry score.
Which is quieter, Ventus V12 evo2 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Hankook Ventus V12 evo2, 73 vs 69 on our noise score.
Which is more comfortable, Ventus V12 evo2 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Hankook Ventus V12 evo2, 67 vs 62 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, Ventus V12 evo2 or ADVAN Fleva V701?
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701, 69 vs 61 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