German publication AutoBild has tested eight summer tires in the 215/55 R18 size specifically aimed at electric vehicles. The test aimed to find tires that could achieve the difficult balance between energy efficiency (for maximum EV range) and safety performance.
AutoBild evaluated models from premium manufacturers like Continental, Goodyear and Michelin alongside offerings from mid-range brands including Falken, Firestone and Yokohama, plus budget option Goodride. Interestingly, only two tires in the test - the Hankook iON evo and Falken e.Ziex - were specifically designed as EV tires, while others were standard tires that manufacturers claim are also suitable for electric vehicles.
4 categories (13 tests)
| Test Category | Best Performer | Worst Performer | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry (2 tests) | |||
| Dry Braking | ▲ Hankook iON Evo: 33.6 M | ▼ Goodride Solmax 1: 37.8 M | 4.2 M (11.1%) |
| Dry Handling | ▲ Hankook iON Evo: 92.8 Km/H | ▼ Goodride Solmax 1: 88.2 Km/H | 4.6 Km/H (5.2%) |
| Wet (5 tests) | |||
| Wet Braking | ▲ Continental PremiumContact 7: 39.4 M | ▼ Goodride Solmax 1: 48.7 M | 9.3 M (19.1%) |
| Wet Handling | ▲ Hankook iON Evo: 74.4 Km/H | ▼ Goodride Solmax 1: 68.4 Km/H | 6.0 Km/H (8.8%) |
| Wet Circle | ▲ Hankook iON Evo: 12.45 s | ▼ Goodride Solmax 1: 13.03 s | 0.6 s (4.5%) |
| Straight Aqua | ▲ Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN: 80.1 Km/H | ▼ Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61: 63.7 Km/H | 16.4 Km/H (25.7%) |
| Curved Aquaplaning | ▲ Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN: 3.02 m/sec2 | ▼ Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61: 2.58 m/sec2 | 0.4 m/sec2 (17.1%) |
| Comfort (2 tests) | |||
| Subj. Comfort | ▲ Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV: 8 Points | ▼ Goodride Solmax 1: 5 Points | 3.0 Points (60.0%) |
| Noise | ▲ Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61: 68.7 dB | ▼ Continental PremiumContact 7: 72.1 dB | 3.4 dB (4.7%) |
| Value (4 tests) | |||
| Wear | ▲ Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV: 49050 KM | ▼ Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN: 28510 KM | 20,540.0 KM (72.0%) |
| Value | ▲ Goodride Solmax 1: 11 Price/1000 | ▼ Michelin Primacy 4 Plus: 16.4 Price/1000 | 5.4 Price/1000 (32.9%) |
| Rolling Resistance | ▲ Falken e.Ziex: 5.86 kg / t | ▼ Continental PremiumContact 7: 7.66 kg / t | 1.8 kg / t (23.5%) |
| ▲ Falken e.Ziex: 410 km | ▼ Continental PremiumContact 7: 344.4 km | 65.6 km (19.0%) | |
Testing was conducted on a Hyundai Kona EV, with tires put through wet and dry handling, braking, and aquaplaning tests. Additionally, the publication measured rolling resistance and conducted a roll-out test to determine real-world range impact. The results showed that in extreme cases, tire choice could affect vehicle range by up to 70 kilometers (43 miles.)
One of the most interesting findings was that the Hankook iON evo, specifically designed for EVs, claimed the overall victory, but standard tires from Continental and Goodyear followed extremely closely behind. This suggests that the gap between dedicated EV tires and high-quality standard tires is minimal when balancing safety and efficiency needs.
Goodyear's EfficientGrip 2 SUV was awarded AutoBild's "Green Tire 2025" environmental seal due to its excellent balance of rolling resistance, longevity, and environmental characteristics.
Dry
Hankook iON evo achieved the shortest braking distance of 33.6 meters, with Continental close behind at 34.5 meters. Goodride Solmax 1 needed significantly more distance at 37.8 meters, showing the safety gap between premium and budget options.
Hankook topped the handling test with 92.8 km/h average speed, followed by Continental at 91.9 km/h and Goodyear at 91.1 km/h. The Goodride again finished last with 88.2 km/h, confirming its limited cornering abilities.
Wet
Continental took the lead in wet conditions with a 39.4-meter stopping distance, just ahead of Hankook at 39.6 meters. The gap to last-place Goodride widened to 48.7 meters, a 23% increase that could be critical in emergency situations.
Hankook led wet handling with 74.4 km/h, narrowly beating Continental's 74.1 km/h. Goodyear maintained third position while Falken e.Ziex fell to second-last despite its EV-specific design.
In the wet circle test, Hankook continued strong with 12.45 seconds, followed by Continental and Yokohama. Goodride again struggled with the slowest time at 13.03 seconds.
Firestone Roadhawk 2 resisted aquaplaning up to 80.1 km/h, significantly better than its performance in other tests. Hankook placed second at 74.8 km/h, while Yokohama lost grip earliest at 63.7 km/h.
Firestone maintained its aquaplaning advantage in curves with 3.02 m/s² lateral acceleration. Hankook again followed in second place, while Yokohama continued to struggle with water evacuation.
Comfort
Yokohama produced the least external noise at 68.7 dB, a key advantage for quiet EV operation. Continental and Firestone were the loudest at over 72 dB, showing their focus on grip over comfort.
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV leads in subjective comfort with 8 points, highlighting its balanced approach to both efficiency and ride quality. Most premium contenders like Hankook, Continental, Michelin and Falken offer respectable comfort with 7 points. The budget Goodride Solmax 1 trails significantly with just 5 points, showing where cost-cutting affects the driving experience most noticeably.
Value
Goodyear showed the best durability with a projected 49,050 km lifespan. Michelin placed second at 44,920 km, while Firestone's 28,510 km was just over half of Goodyear's life expectancy.
Budget Goodride offered the best cost efficiency at €11 per 1,000 km despite performance limitations. Goodyear combined durability with competitive pricing for second place, while premium-priced Michelin ranked last at €16.4 per 1,000 km.
Falken e.Ziex recorded the lowest rolling resistance at 5.86 kg/t, followed by Michelin and Hankook. Continental had the highest at 7.66 kg/t, showing its priority on grip over efficiency.
Falken's efficiency translated to 410 km range, 65.6 km more than Continental's 344.4 km. Hankook balanced performance with efficiency for second place at 381.3 km, highlighting how tire choice affects EV range.
Results
1st: Hankook iON Evo | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Hankook iON evo, specifically designed for electric vehicles, achieved first place with outstanding wet and dry performance. It delivered excellent braking distances (39.6m in wet, 33.6m in dry), strong handling characteristics, and good aquaplaning resistance. With a projected lifespan of 43,120km and moderate rolling resistance (6.81 kg/t), it provides a good balance between safety and efficiency. The tire offered 381.3km of range in the EV test and strong cornering grip, securing an overall "exemplary" rating. Read Reviews | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2nd: Continental PremiumContact 7 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Continental's PremiumContact 7 delivered the shortest wet braking distance (39.4m) and strong dry performance. Despite having the highest rolling resistance in the test (7.66 kg/t) and lowest range impact (344.4km), its safety credentials remained impressive with sharp handling characteristics and a projected lifespan of 40,890km. This tire secured second place with minimal difference from the winner, proving standard tires can perform effectively on EVs. Read Reviews | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3rd: Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV achieved third place and won the "Green Tire" award for its environmental credentials. Its standout feature was exceptional longevity with a projected 49,050km lifespan - the highest in the test. The tire offered balanced wet (42.2m braking) and dry performance with moderate rolling resistance (7.15 kg/t). Its range impact was 373.1km, placing it mid-field, but its overall combination of efficiency and safety secured its position as the most environmentally friendly option. Read Reviews | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
4th: Michelin Primacy 4+ | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Michelin Primacy 4+ delivered good all-round performance with short braking distances (43.2m wet, 35.1m dry) and solid handling. It showed low rolling resistance (6.51 kg/t) and delivered 377.2km of range in the test. As the most expensive tire (€735), it offered strong longevity (44,920km) but suffered from limited aquaplaning resistance, especially in curved conditions. While not explicitly marketed as an EV tire, it performed well in efficiency metrics. Read Reviews | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5th: Falken e.Ziex | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Falken e.Ziex, specifically designed for EVs, stood out for having the lowest rolling resistance (5.86 kg/t) and provided the best range result (410km). It demonstrated good aquaplaning resistance but showed longer wet braking distances (45.6m) compared to top performers. With average dry handling and a moderate projected lifespan of 36,790km, it secured a "good" overall rating with clear focus on efficiency over ultimate grip. Read Reviews | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6th: Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Firestone Roadhawk 2 excelled in aquaplaning resistance, achieving the best performance in both straight-line (80.1 km/h) and curved aquaplaning tests (3.02 m/s²). However, it showed limitations in wet braking (41.8m) and overall grip. With a modest projected lifespan of 28,510km (the lowest in the test) and mid-range rolling resistance (7.33 kg/t), the tire's range impact was below average at 352.6km. Its performance earned a "satisfactory" rating. Read Reviews | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
7th: Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Yokohama BluEarth-XT recorded the quietest passing noise in the test (68.7 dB at 80 km/h), making it ideal for silent EVs. Its dry performance was reasonable, but wet weather capabilities showed weaknesses, particularly in aquaplaning resistance where it recorded the lowest values. With a projected lifespan of 30,280km and high rolling resistance (7.58 kg/t), its range impact was 373.1km. The tire received a "satisfactory" rating for its mixed performance profile. Read Reviews | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
8th: Goodride Solmax 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As the budget option, the Goodride Solmax 1 showed significant compromises in safety. It recorded the longest wet braking distance (48.7m) and limited handling capabilities. Its projected lifespan was 31,030km with moderate rolling resistance (7.22 kg/t), providing a range of 373.2km. Despite its affordable price (€340), its safety limitations resulted in a "conditionally recommended" rating, placing it last in the test. Read Reviews | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Best UUHP Tires
Best All Season Tires
Best Winter Tires
