Test Result Video
Extreme Performance Summer – 2025 Test 4D
Length: (14:02)
Tires Tested
-
-
What We Liked
A good balance of wet/dry performance.
-
What We'd Improve
We'd like to see that corner-exit grip loss tamed, and it's very noisy on the street.
-
Summary
It's not a top raw performer, but it’s a well-rounded endurance option.
-
-
What We Liked
It's a strong dry tire and a little kinder on the road than its sibling.
-
What We'd Improve
Same corner-exit concerns as Rival +, and just a general traction boost.
-
Summary
It doesn't feel quite different enough (on a short track at least) to advantage itself over the Rival +, while also being a step back in the wet.
-
-
What We Liked
Ample traction in dry, manageable in the wet, reasonable on-road civility.
-
What We'd Improve
More grip without sacrificing its excellent balance of characteristics.
-
Summary
The embodiment of Extreme Performance Summer, it just does everything well.
-
-
What We Liked
Points and shoots where you want it with nice, natural steering. Progressive and forgiving breakaway.
-
What We'd Improve
Just a little more braking authority and grip.
-
Summary
An affable contender in the space with a well-rounded character.
-
-
What We Liked
Plenty of outright ability, and surprisingly nice on the road for the category.
-
What We'd Improve
The steering feels more disconnected than we'd like.
-
Summary
A strong tire with a lot to love, we just wish it communicated more and felt better to drive.
-
-
What We Liked
A fairly nice on-road drive coupled with heaps of dry traction and fast laps.
-
What We'd Improve
It's not a lot of fun when it's wet out.
-
Summary
A collection of strong, usable characteristics that don't gel perfectly in all situations, but it's undeniably good.
-
-
What We Liked
Beefy steering and strong traction, it's capable and composed across the board.
-
What We'd Improve
Just a little bit sharper steering and a traction boost.
-
Summary
Even if it's not the best in any one area, the lack of any glaring weaknesses make this an easy tire to like.
Vehicle(s) Used
2024 BMW M2
Test Result Charts
Use these dropdowns to compare results and sort data to find any details you're looking for. When favorites are selected, this chart will default to only showing favorites. This can be changed by using the toggle below.
Spider Chart Comparison
Want to really get down to it with the data? Try this head-to-head comparison. When favorites are selected, this chart will default to showing favorites first.
Test Report
Introduction
Extreme Performance Summer tires (EP) are the pinnacle of true street tires when it comes to dry traction. They occupy a lovely space where they're clearly designed for street use, with enough civility to handle normal commuting, coupled with the capability to really have fun and compete during race season or events.
While we've naturally put them to task on a local road course, that's also why we're taking them through the "real life" portion of testing. When they're not on a track, how do they feel on the road? How noisy are they? How do they handle if it does rain? Naturally, given these are performance tires, we also want to drive them very fast around the Tire Rack track to see how they deal with shorter autocross-esque conditions.
As usual, we'll break down our experiences with them on our real-world road ride in our BMW M2, in size 275/35R19, then discuss their traction and subjective behavior on both a wet and dry track to understand how these tires act when pushed to their limits, mimicking the kind of high-speed emergency maneuvers you might need to deal with in a sudden crisis. In addition, we’ll be discussing the more objective metrics for these tires, namely braking distances and lap times, to offer a full picture of what you can expect from each.
-
- Dry Lap Time: 27.52
- Wet Lap Time: 31.97
The endurance-focused sibling of the two BFGoodrich tires featured in this test, the g-Force Rival + would not confuse anyone for being comfort-focused. At lower speeds, it dealt with smaller bumps succinctly, though it was transparent throughout, and at highway speeds impacts were rough, even smaller cracks and strips. Noise was omnipresent: growling over crosscut concrete, resonant and high frequency cyclical noise on the smooth portion of the highway. The steering response during the road ride was very quick, with little dead zone and ramp up, maybe a little too quick. Still very good, but worth being aware of its eagerness.
Wet track testing with the g-Force Rival + required a bit of an adjustment, largely due to how edgy it could feel at the limit. It would recover quickly, which was a point in its favor, but it was a fine line between "I have enough grip to manage this" and "oh no." Slow in to turns, fast out was the only manageable strategy. Somewhat ironically, it was one of the better tires when braking (164 feet) from 60-0 in the wet. Steering felt great though, it was just difficult to maximize with such a narrow plateau at the limit.
Things were better in the dry, and we didn't have to be quite as delicate with it, though there were still some parts of the track, notably into the 180 or occasionally at corner-exit where traction would abruptly run out into understeer. Braking was very strong, steering was pointy, it could just be a little more locked down.
-
- Dry Lap Time: 27.58
- Wet Lap Time: 32.24
The g-Force Rival S 1.5 was very similar to its sibling on the road ride, both in tone and its comfort with imperfections in the road. Plenty of hollow-sounding impact rings, resonance over crosscut concrete, and ample cyclical noise. The stiffness of the tire led to some jumpiness over impacts that felt like being tossed around. The steering was a slight improvement over its counterpart though - it was still fast, but not quite as immediate, with a little more ramp-up that kept it from feeling too darty.
Out on the wet track, the g-Force Rival S 1.5 delivered notably less traction than its sibling, which made it even more challenging to manage at the limit. Recovery from any oversteps took time, and didn't offer much margin for error. Steering was quick and precise, but overall grip and stability just couldn't keep up. Inputs had to be measured; small missteps could easily lead to slips and slides. Braking took just over 170 feet from 60 mph, and its lateral grip didn't inspire much confidence either, demanding full focus throughout each lap.
Once the track dried off however, the sibling separation went with it, and both tires felt very similar, though the g-Force Rival S 1.5 felt more planted on the whole. Not significantly, but enough to notice. It had a similar tendency to understeer toward the end of turns though. Steering, balance, handling, braking, all felt good, but on a short track, it didn't feel strongly differentiated from the g-Force Rival +.
-
- Dry Lap Time: 27.46
- Wet Lap Time: 31.05
One of the longstanding champions of the EP category, the Potenza RE-71RS has always been notable not just for its speed, but its ability to balance wet/dry/comfort to really set it apart. That held true during our road ride as well. No one would confuse the ride for a plush experience, but it didn't feel as harsh as some of the other tires we tested, offering a modicum of additional cushion over smaller impacts. It wasn't particularly quiet, either, but there wasn't an overwhelming amount of tonal variety. Pattern noise was present, and it became hard to unhear the consistent cyclical noise once it caught our attention. However, somewhat expectedly, the steering was a real highlight: firm, natural, loading up nicely without losing any of the responsiveness and speed characteristic of a performance product.
In wet testing, the Potenza RE-71RS showed a clear upper hand in traction and overall drivability compared to most of the tires in the group. The front end was authoritative, offering confidence during cornering, and providing solid feedback. Braking felt stronger as well, and it was objectively the best in the test, stopping from 60mph in 155 feet, a full 15-20ft shorter than most of its competition. While hydroplaning was still a present concern, it didn't take much extra effort to adjust speed and input to avoid it. Perhaps most importantly: it behaved predictably. Loss and recovery of grip felt progressive rather than abrupt. It rewarded clean laps and stayed composed under pressure.
In the dry, with even more traction to work with, it was comfortably capable. Weaving easily through the slalom, it felt composed and predictable under pressure. Braking performance stood out, particularly on the first lap while the tire was still cool. The generous traction allowed our team to push confidently without needing to tiptoe around the limit either. It wasn't the technical best in any objective metric, but it was competitively close, and there was no argument that it certainly felt the best to drive.
-
- Dry Lap Time: 27.48
- Wet Lap Time: 32.23
An update to the already notable Azenis RT660, the + in the name comes with a host of subtle tweaks promised by Falken, including better heat management, weight reduction and a larger contact patch. Ride comfort is not typically on the list of major concerns for performance products at this level, and it was unsurprisingly firm. To its credit, however, while the big hits were pronounced, they weren't harsh, and it remained composed over impacts. The noise levels were typical for the category, and standout tones included hollow ringing over tar strips hits and a kind of "sizzle” over crosscut concrete and paint strips. Steering was again, typically good for the category, with quick reactions and reasonable communication. It was only right on center that it felt like there was some play, not a true dead zone, not immediately responsive, and that could have used some improvement.
Speaking of improvements, the previous iteration of the Azenis RT660+ was a fun tire to drive in the wet, and the update turned out to be just as much, if not moreso. It would slide, glide, and required many small corrections to keep it from getting sideways (which it would do with little provocation), but its ability to recover quickly, lively steering response, and planted front end made wrestling its less cooperative rear-end around the track exciting. It wasn't the fastest (but it wasn't bad) or quickest to stop (braking took 170 feet from 60mph), but it was fun.
With a dry surface, the Azenis RT660+ felt just as playful, while still feeling composed, connected, and consistent. Steering was quick and precise, joined with a natural balance that let the front initiate turns confidently and the rear engage or follow as desired. Traction could have been stronger, but overall it made excellent use of what was available. Braking was stable and easy to manage, if not quite at the top of the charts.
-
- Dry Lap Time: 27.39
- Wet Lap Time: 33.01
The Sportnex CR-S made a strong impression during last year's extreme performance tire testing, both for its objective metrics and surprisingly pleasant on-road experience for the category. We found that to be true again this year as well, with the damping over impacts doing a lot of work to keep it from feeling too harsh at any point. Noise was likewise moderate: with some growling over various surfaces and paint interaction, but missing the impact noises common among the other tires tested. Steering on the road had a nice level of resistance and accuracy. While there was functionally no straight-tracking dead spot, it didn't feel overeager, despite the immediacy of its reaction. Very nice.
With a wet track to deal with, the Sportnex CR-S was, objectively, the slowest to lap, the furthest to brake, and it felt every bit like it was. It was easy to spin the rear tires, which wasn't unusual among the group, but it didn't recover as quickly as some of the other options. It would slide around, but not in a fun controllable way. Everything needed to be approached more carefully because it was down on traction: brake carefully, apply throttle carefully, steer carefully, separate inputs, this was not its comfort zone.
In the dry however, the Sportnex CR-S was, if not a complete inversion, substantially more capable. It's worth noting that it did have a bit of fall-off after the first couple of laps, not bad, but worth considering. Braking felt strong, if a slight step back from the strongest tires, though its mid-corner grip more than compensated. Steering was quick, pointy, and authoritative. It put everything together well enough to be close to the fastest we tested, even if it continued to struggle with communication.
-
- Dry Lap Time: 27.29
- Wet Lap Time: 32.44
The newest addition to the Tire Rack lineup on offer here, the Tempesta P1 P-01R has a lot to prove, and some tough competition to prove it with. On the road, at least, it was firm, like all of the tires here, but with just enough cushion to lessen some of the harshness of the road. Road and impact noise were kept relatively well-managed, with few standout tones, but the tread interaction on most surfaces was higher volume, balancing it out a bit. On the smooth surfaces, it quieted down nicely however. It was nice to handle too. Steering followed a progressive curve of build-up with a well-proportioned on-center feel.
On the damp track, the Tempesta P1 P-01R delivered an inconsistent and often frustrating experience. The steering felt razor-sharp, but not always helpful, often demanding restraint to avoid overloading the front. The rear end stepped out with minimal provocation, and putting power down was a challenge. Braking distances were among the longest in the group (177ft from 60mph), and were difficult to manage, making it easy to overshoot corners. It had moments of composure at speed, but recovery from mistakes was slow, and was overall just acceptable.
However, once the track dried off, this was the fastest tire we tested. It delivered strong mid-corner grip, with traction holding steady through a few laps before showing mild falloff. Steering was very quick, delivering accuracy and control. Braking felt solid, and was the best in the test from 60mph. It put power down well at corner exit and rewarded smooth inputs, particularly during brake-to-turn transitions where it could push if rushed. A confident, high-performing package overall.
-
- Dry Lap Time: 27.39
- Wet Lap Time: 31.15
A category benchmark already known for being an excellent all-rounder, the ADVAN A052 has historically been an excellent yardstick for comparison while also being a quick, genteel tire on the road in its own right. During our road ride, it delivered a ride that was appropriately firm, but composed, with a clear sense of control and stability. Tread noise was moderate for the category, with some cyclical patterns and a light growl on smoother surfaces. It produced more buzz at highway speeds over crosscut concrete, but overall volume stayed in that moderate window, and (mostly) quieted down on cleaner asphalt. Steering felt light and quick, though it lacked some of the immediacy and progressive buildup of the strongest tires in this round of testing. Even so, it remained solid and predictable.
In wet testing, the ADVAN A052 showcased good balance and strong traction levels, but it was very susceptible to hydroplaning especially when pushed with aggressive throttle or steering. Breakaway tended to be abrupt, and recovery required careful management. When kept within its limits, it offered the pace to put together a competitive lap, but stepping over the edge meant things could unravel quickly.
During the dry testing portion, the ADVAN A052 delivered quick, consistent laps, with strong braking and respectable lateral grip. Steering was fast and confident, though not razor-sharp, and tended to feel slightly loose at the limit. Handling leaned more toward brute-force capability than surgical precision, which made it easy to drive and predictable in its responses. Balance remained steady even as grip fell off slightly on later laps, and recovery was manageable with smooth inputs. It may not have been the tidiest, but as one of the fastest tires on average, it was certainly effective.
Test Summary
Extreme Performance Summer (EP) tires are, as categories we test go, some of the most unadulterated fun to drive. They're specialized in a way that, while we see how they do on the road and when it's wet, it's ultimately less of a concern than how they perform at their best on a dry surface. It's good knowledge to have, because at the end of a season, or between events, it's possible you might want to just use up the tires, have some fun with them.
Among the tires that embody the best of purpose-built design while also possessing enough capability to be used in the wet, Bridgestone's Potenza RE-71RS continues to be the shining star of the category. It does just about everything really, really well. None of the EP tires approach the pleasant drive of Max Performance Summer or touring products for a daily commute, and this is no exception, but it's also not terrible either.
Similarly, Yokohama's ADVAN A052 delivers a dependable experience across the board: it's fast, grippy, decent in the wet and actually nicer on the road, it's just not the absolute best at any one of those things. Conversely, there's really nothing bad that can be said about it either.
Vitour made a strong debut with the Tempesta P1 P-01R. It was our fastest tire in the dry, lively on the road with some nice steering, but it was a bear to drive with water on the track. A very worthy new addition to EP.
The Nankang story here with its Sportnex CR-S was almost beat-for-beat similar. Less-than-ideal wet performance combined with good road manners and a fast lap. Its somewhat polarizing steering feel held it back a bit though.
Falken's Azenis RT660+ update made some excellent strides in creating a product that feels good to drive, with an affable, balanced attitude; it falls into the middle of the pack here in pretty much every metric, subjectively and objectively, it's good…but not quite great.
Finally, the BFGoodrich twins. It's almost a bit unfair calling them twins, since their compounds and intended uses are different, but with their tread design and narrow separation on performance, they clearly share a lot in common. That isn't to say there are no differences - the g-Force Rival S 1.5 offers a little more agreeable steering feel on the road, while also taking a more significant step back compared to the g-Force Rival + on a wet track. Interestingly, during the short run on our dry track, they were almost fundamentally tied (contrary to the experience we had on a longer track in our other test), making for an interesting comparison between the two.
Ready for a new set of performance tires? Find the right tires for you at Tire Rack, with free shipping to over 10,000 Recommended Installer tire shops.
Other Tire Tests
We can't help ourselves, we're always testing more tires out on the track. It's a good thing too, because with so many different categories and so many different features to evaluate, there aren't many places you're going to find this type of in-depth analysis. It's not a stretch to say with each tire test we do, you're going to learn something new - and maybe even find your next set of tires.
-
Tires Tested
- BFGoodrich g-Force Rival +
- BFGoodrich g-Force Rival S 1.5
- Bridgestone Potenza RE-71RS
- Falken Azenis RT660+
- Nankang Sportnex CR-S
- Yokohama ADVAN A052
- Vitour Tempesta P1 P-01R
-
Tires Tested
- Bridgestone Potenza RE-71RS
- Falken Azenis RT660
- Kumho Ecsta V730
- Nankang Sportnex CR-S
- Yokohama ADVAN A052
- Yokohama ADVAN NEOVA AD09
- Michelin Pilot Sport 4S
-
Tires Tested
- Bridgestone Potenza RE-71RS
- Falken Azenis RT660
- Kumho Ecsta V730
- Nankang Sportnex CR-S
- Yokohama ADVAN A052
- Yokohama ADVAN NEOVA AD09
- Michelin Pilot Sport 4S