Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews. Based on 4 + 0 road tests and 2,189 + 31 owner reviews. How we score
ADVAN Fleva V701 is ahead, 70–64
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests 73 · 4 tests Owners 58 · 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.”
Tests – · none yet Owners 62 · 31 reviews
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
| Source | ADVAN Fleva V701 | C Drive2 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 3 / – tests | 77 | ≈ 65 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 69 | 61 |
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 77.5 + 40% × 68.5 = 74
C Drive2: 60% × 65 (est.) + 40% × 61 = 63
No road tests of dry for C Drive2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).
| Source | ADVAN Fleva V701 | C Drive2 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 3 / – tests | 70 | ≈ 68 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 65 | 66 |
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 70 + 40% × 65.2 = 68
C Drive2: 60% × 67.6 (est.) + 40% × 65.8 = 67
No road tests of wet for C Drive2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).
| Source | ADVAN Fleva V701 | C Drive2 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | ≈ 50 (est.) | – |
| Reviews found online | 10 | – |
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 50.2 (est.) + 40% × 10.4 = 34
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 0.33).
| Source | ADVAN Fleva V701 | C Drive2 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / – tests | 62 | ≈ 69 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 63 | 66 |
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 62.5 + 40% × 63.3 = 63
C Drive2: 60% × 68.6 (est.) + 40% × 66.1 = 68
No road tests of comfort for C Drive2. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.
| Source | ADVAN Fleva V701 | C Drive2 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / – tests | 75 | – |
| Reviews found online | 62 | – |
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 74.7 + 40% × 61.8 = 70
| Source | ADVAN Fleva V701 | C Drive2 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 3 / – tests | 74 | ≈ 64 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 61 | 60 |
ADVAN Fleva V701: 60% × 74.1 + 40% × 60.8 = 69
C Drive2: 60% × 63.9 (est.) + 40% × 59.9 = 62
No road tests of treadwear for C Drive2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).
| Source | ADVAN Fleva V701 | C Drive2 |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews found online | 71 | 61 |
| Category | Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 | Yokohama C Drive2 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 70 | 64 |
| Dry | 74 | 63 |
| Wet | 68 | 67 |
| Snow | 34 | – |
| Comfort | 63 | 68 |
| Noise | 70 | – |
| Treadwear | 69 | 62 |
| Handling (owners) | 71 | 61 |
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.
ADVAN Fleva V701
C Drive2
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 | ADVAN Fleva V701 | C Drive2 | Δ | Head-to-head |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Also published by the testers (not in the score) | |||||
| Overall Ranking | Overall | #6/22 2022 Consumer Reports Ultra High Performance Summer Tires | #7/10 2015 Auto Bild 215/55 R16 Technical Tyre Test | – | 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 discussions around the Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 primarily consist of prospective buyers asking about daily drivability, treadwear longevity, and value compared to premium alternatives. Those considering or using them note solid availability in smaller or niche wheel sizes and appreciate their accessible price point. The limited direct experiential feedback praises responsive turn-in, stiffer sidewalls, and decent ride comfort compared to rival sporty summer tires.
“Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 in 2026 Do they make sense today? I’d put them on a hatchback (1300kg) and I usually drive up to 180-200 km/h with quick accelerations and curves in my daily. Weather is usually sunny, but sometimes it rains. Are them still a safe and a good choice, or are there some other brands that should result better for my driving style (and for my 215/45 r18 rims)? Thanks in advance.”
“Yokohama advan fleva v701? Currently looking at stock sizes for my 99 MRS and the v701s are the only decent set I can find. I live in Canada and I was planning on ordering them for next week, and just thought to do one more validation check before driving out to Bellingham. Pretty new to picking out my own tires, trying to also stay within 550-600usd or maxish 800-850cad including tax if possible.”
“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.”
Based on 22 community posts
We haven't collected enough community discussion about this tire yet.
| Attribute | A · Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 | B · Yokohama C Drive2 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | 70 | 3 |
| Rim diameters | 15″ – 20″ | 16″ – 18″ |
| Tread depth | 9/32″ | — |
| UTQG | 300 A A | — |
| Sidewall | Blackwall | — |
| Max pressure | 51 psi | — |
| Sizes in common | 3 | 3 |
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701
Yokohama C Drive2
Winner: Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 — better dry, handling and treadwear. Pick the Yokohama C Drive2 if comfort matters most to you.
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 scores 74 vs 63 on dry.
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 scores 71 vs 61 on handling.
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701 scores 69 vs 62 on treadwear.
Yokohama C Drive2 scores 68 vs 63 on comfort.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Neither, by our numbers: 68 vs 67 on the wet score, within 3 points.
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701, 74 vs 63 on our dry score.
Yokohama C Drive2, 68 vs 63 on our comfort score.
Yokohama ADVAN Fleva V701, 69 vs 62 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
