Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs Winrun R330: In recent years, the budget tire segment has seen a significant rise in popularity, with many affordable options emerging predominantly from China. However, how do these budget tires perform against the industry’s best? In this ultimate Ultra-High-Performance (UUHP) tire showdown, we pit the renowned Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S against the budget-friendly Winrun R330. Get ready for an intense battle as we compare these two contenders and see if the Winrun R330 can hold its ground against the performance king, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Table of Contents
Results: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs Winrun R330
Results below were taken from 2024 Autobild Sports Cars Tire Test with a total of 7 tires tested, The graph below shows the comparison between Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs Winrun R330 based on the relevant performance category. Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was set as a reference hence at the 100% mark.
Note that for both wet & dry handling evaluation, the average lap speed was used instead of the standard lap time & subjective rating. The tire size of interest is 265/35 R19 and 295/30 R20 which is a common tire size for BMW M6 Gran Coupe. You can check out our latest tire size table for more information. The testing vehicle is a Mercedes AMG GT which is a really really fast car.
Wet
In wet braking tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S outperforms the Winrun R330 significantly. The Michelin stops in 53.4 meters, while the Winrun takes 68.3 meters to come to a halt from 100 km/h. This difference of 14.9 meters is equivalent to about three and a half car lengths, highlighting a substantial performance gap.
In wet handling, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S also excels with an average speed of 76.6 km/h compared to the Winrun R330’s 65 km/h. This demonstrates the Michelin’s superior grip and control, providing a smoother and faster handling experience in wet conditions. When it comes to the wet circle test, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S completes the lap in 11.14 seconds, whereas the Winrun R330 takes 13.03 seconds. This difference of 1.89 seconds further emphasizes the Michelin’s better traction and stability on wet surfaces.
In straight aquaplaning, both tires perform almost equally, with the Michelin reaching a max slipping speed of 94.4 km/h and the Winrun closely behind at 94.3 km/h, showing a negligible difference in this aspect.
Overall, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S consistently outperforms the Winrun R330 in wet conditions, offering better braking, handling, and lap times, while both are nearly identical in straight-line aquaplaning resistance.
Winrun R330 :
- -22% in wet braking
- -15% in wet handling (average speed)
- -15% in wet circle
- ~0% in straight aquaplaning
Dry
In dry braking tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S stops significantly sooner than the Winrun R330, taking 37.8 meters compared to the Winrun’s 44.8 meters from 100 km/h to a complete stop. This 7-meter difference equates to about one and a half car lengths, highlighting a notable advantage for the Michelin.
In dry handling, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S also demonstrates superior performance with an average speed of 109.9 km/h, whereas the Winrun R330 averages 106.2 km/h. This difference of 3.7 km/h indicates better grip and control for the Michelin, allowing for faster and more confident handling on dry surfaces.
Overall, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S clearly outperforms the Winrun R330 in both dry braking and handling, showcasing its superior capabilities in dry conditions.
Winrun R330 :
- -16% in dry braking
- -3% in dry handling (average speed)
Exterior Noise
In terms of exterior noise performance, both the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S and the Winrun R330 are nearly identical. The Michelin produces 71.2 dB, while the Winrun is just slightly louder at 71.3 dB. This minimal difference of 0.1 dB is practically imperceptible, making their noise levels almost the same.
Winrun R330 :
- ~0% in exterior noise (+0.1 dB)
Rolling Resistance
In terms of rolling resistance, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S shows a slightly better performance with a value of 8.11 N/kN, compared to the Winrun R330’s 8.23 N/kN. The difference of 0.12 N/kN indicates that the Michelin tire is marginally more efficient.
Winrun R330 :
- -1% in rolling resistance
Price
When comparing the prices of the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S and the Winrun R330 in the 265/35 R19 size, the cost difference is striking. The Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S is priced at €348 per tire, reflecting its status as a top-tier performance tire. In contrast, the Winrun R330 is available for just €98 per tire. This means that the Winrun R330 is about 255% cheaper than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
This substantial price difference underscores a significant advantage for budget-conscious consumers. While the Michelin offers premium performance and features, the Winrun R330 provides a highly economical alternative, making it an attractive option for those looking to save money. This massive reduction in cost can make a considerable difference, especially when equipping all four tires, resulting in a total saving of €1,000 or more when choosing the Winrun R330 over the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S. This cost-effectiveness is a key selling point for budget tires like the Winrun R330.
Tire size: 265/35 R19
- Pilot Sport 4 S: € 348
- Winrun R330 : € 98
Difference: -255% more cheaper for Winrun R330.
Summary
As a tire expert, I can confidently say that the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S is the deserving winner in this duel against the Winrun R330. Despite the significant price advantage of the Winrun, the Michelin excels in all critical performance areas. In wet conditions, the Michelin stops nearly 15 meters shorter and handles better, providing superior grip and safety. In dry conditions, it also brakes faster and handles more effectively, showcasing its advanced engineering. While the Winrun R330 is an excellent budget option, it cannot match the Michelin’s performance and safety features. For those who prioritize top-notch performance and driving experience, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S is well worth the investment.
Dr Edwin Pang