Continental AllSeasonContact 2 vs China Tires: In the world of all-season tires, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 stands as a reputable choice, celebrated for its reliable performance across various weather conditions. It faces stiff competition from the Fronway Fronwing AS from Shandong, China, a tire that not only promises durability and efficiency but also comes at a notably lower cost, typical of many Chinese-manufactured tires.
How do these two contenders compare in terms of features, performance, and overall value? This comparison aims to find out, setting the stage for an intriguing duel between established European quality and enticing Chinese affordability
Table of Contents
Results: Continental AllSeasonContact 2 vs China Tires
Results below were taken from the 2024 Tyre Reviews All Season Tyre Test. A total of 7 tires were tested this time around with snow & ice testing to gauge the all season performances. The graph below shows the comparison between Continental AllSeasonContact 2 vs China Tires (Fronway Fronwing AS) based on the relevant performance category. The Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was set as a reference hence at the 100% mark.
As both tires are categorized as all season tires with a 3 peak mountain logo on it, an extensive snow & ice testing was conducted. Note that for subjective comfort evaluation, we equate 1 point as 5%. The tire size of interest is a 205/55 R16 which is a common tire size for Volkswagen Golf and Jetta. You can check out our latest tire size table for more information. The testing vehicle of choice is a Volkswagen Golf 1.4 TSI.
Wet
When comparing the wet performance of the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 and the Fronway Fronwing AS, distinct differences emerge. The Continental AllSeasonContact 2 showcases superior capabilities, with a wet braking distance significantly shorter than its competitor—only 34.1 meters compared to the Fronwing AS’s 48.7 meters from a speed of 80 to 5 km/h. This marks a notable 14.6-meter difference, underscoring the Continental’s enhanced safety in wet conditions.
In terms of wet handling, the difference remains stark. The AllSeasonContact 2 completes a wet handling circuit in 86.1 seconds, far outpacing the Fronwing AS, which takes 99.7 seconds. This slower performance by the Fronwing AS might suggest a less responsive tire under wet conditions. Moreover, the subjective wet handling score highlights an extreme discrepancy, with the Continental achieving a perfect 10/10, while the Fronwing AS receives a surprisingly low score of 1/10. This drastic score suggests that the Fronwing AS may struggle significantly with grip and control when wet.
Adding to the concerns, the Fronwing AS’s performance in straight aquaplaning tests also falls short. It reaches a slipping speed of 70.2 km/h, whereas the Continental maintains a higher speed of 78.5 km/h before slipping, providing better resistance to aquaplaning.
Initial observations indicate that the Fronway may have inappropriately combined a winter tire compound with an all-season tread pattern, which could explain the underwhelming wet performance of the Fronwing AS. This mismatch highlights the importance of choosing a tire specifically designed for all-season use, like the Continental AllSeasonContact 2, which clearly excels in wet conditions.
Fronwing AS (China tire):
- -30% in wet braking
- -14% in wet handling (lap time)
- -45% in wet handling (subj)
- -11% in straight aquaplaning
Snow
In the snow performance comparison between the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 and the Fronway Fronwing AS, some interesting findings come to light, particularly in the context of snow braking. The Fronwing AS slightly outperforms the Continental, stopping at 17.9 meters in snow braking tests from 40 to 0 km/h, compared to the Continental’s 18 meters. This marginally better performance by just 0.1 meter could lend some credence to the hypothesis that the Fronwing AS uses a winter tire compound on an all-season pattern, which, despite its drawbacks in wet conditions, seems to pay dividends on snowy surfaces.
However, when evaluating other snow performance metrics, the Continental generally maintains an edge. In snow traction, the Continental accelerates from 0 to 20 km/h in 8.04 seconds, faster than the Fronwing AS’s time of 9.11 seconds. This indicates better initial grip and quicker responsiveness under snowy conditions for the Continental.
Snow handling times are nearly identical, with the Fronwing AS completing a lap in 92.16 seconds and the Continental just slightly behind at 92.18 seconds. Despite the close results, the subjective snow handling scores reveal a slight preference for the Continental, scoring 9.8/10 compared to the Fronwing AS’s 9/10. This suggests that while the lap times are similar, the feel and control offered by the Continental may be perceived as slightly superior.
Overall, while the Fronwing AS shows competitive snow braking, potentially due to a winter compound in its design, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 demonstrates consistently strong performance across other snow conditions, offering a well-rounded choice for winter driving.
Fronwing AS (China tire):
- +1% in snow braking
- -12% in snow traction
- ~0% in snow handling (lap times)
- -4% in snow handling (subj)
Ice
On ice, the performance differences between the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 and the Fronway Fronwing AS are subtle yet noteworthy. In the ice braking test, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 slightly outperforms the Fronwing AS, with a stopping distance of 6.67 meters from 25 to 0 km/h, compared to 6.79 meters for the Fronwing AS. This difference of 0.12 meters suggests that the Continental provides slightly better control and safety during critical braking situations on ice.
Additionally, when it comes to ice traction, which measures how quickly the tires can accelerate from 0 to 20 km/h on ice, the Continental again shows superior performance. It accelerates in 4.78 seconds, faster than the Fronwing AS, which takes 4.94 seconds. This shorter acceleration time by 0.16 seconds indicates that the Continental offers better initial grip on icy surfaces.
These results reinforce the overall performance superiority of the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 in icy conditions, providing slightly better braking and traction compared to the Fronwing AS. This enhanced control and responsiveness on ice make the Continental a more reliable choice for winter driving conditions.
Fronwing AS (China tire):
- -2% in ice braking
- -3% in ice traction
Dry
In dry conditions, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 outshines the Fronway Fronwing AS. It stops 2.2 meters shorter in dry braking tests, needing only 41.4 meters to come to a halt from 80 to 5 km/h, compared to the Fronwing’s 43.6 meters. Additionally, the Continental completes a dry handling lap 2.3 seconds faster, recording a time of 55.8 seconds against the Fronwing’s 58.1 seconds. Subjectively, it also rates higher, scoring 9.5/10 in handling versus 8.5/10 for the Fronwing AS. These results highlight the Continental’s superior performance and handling in dry conditions.
Fronwing AS (China tire):
- -5%in dry braking
- -4% in dry handling (lap time)
- -5% in dry handling (subj)
Noise
In terms of exterior noise performance, both the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 and the Fronway Fronwing AS show very similar results. The Continental produces a noise level of 71 dB, while the Fronwing AS is slightly noisier at 71.1 dB. This minimal difference of 0.1 dB indicates that both tires are comparable in terms of noise emission, with neither having a significant advantage over the other in this aspect.
Fronwing AS (China tire):
- ~0% in exterior noise (+0.1 dB)
Rolling Resistance
In the rolling resistance comparison, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 demonstrates better efficiency than the Fronway Fronwing AS. The Continental has a rolling resistance of 7.25 N/kN, which is lower than the Fronwing’s 7.62 N/kN. This difference of 0.37 N/kN indicates that the Continental tire requires less energy to maintain motion, leading to potentially better fuel efficiency and a reduced environmental impact over time.
Fronwing AS (China tire):
- -5% in rolling resistance
Price
The price comparison between the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 and the Fronway Fronwing AS reveals a clear advantage for the Fronwing AS. Priced at €70, the Fronwing AS is significantly cheaper than the Continental, which costs €97 for the same tire size (205/55 R16). This represents a 39% price reduction, underscoring the Fronwing AS as a much more affordable option. This price difference highlights the primary appeal of many Chinese-manufactured tires: they are notably cheaper, offering substantial savings.
Tire size: 205/55 R16
- AllSeasonContact 2: € 97
- Fronwing AS (China tire) : € 70
Difference: -39% more cheaper for Fronwing AS.
Summary
As a tire expert, I can confidently conclude that the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 is the clear winner in this comparison. The performance gap between the Continental and the Fronway Fronwing AS is significant, particularly in critical safety areas such as wet performance. The Continental’s superior wet braking distance and handling offer crucial advantages that enhance safety on wet roads. The Fronwing AS, while cheaper, showed dangerously poor performance in wet conditions, which raises concerns about its reliability and safety.
While the upfront cost savings of the Fronwing AS might be tempting, these savings do not justify the compromise on safety and overall performance. Investing in the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 is a smarter choice for those prioritizing durability, safety, and effectiveness across various driving conditions. In the long run, the higher initial cost of the Continental is a worthwhile investment for the peace of mind and security it provides.
Dr. Edwin Pang