71
/ 100
Objective (60%)
–/100
No test data yet
User signal (40%)
69/100
11 owner reviews
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
Head-to-head
Updated May 2026
Bridgestone Turanza T005 RFT vs Yokohama Advan Sport V105S — Compared (May 2026)
Our Relative Score blends 60% objective test data with 40% owner-review signal — so any two tires can be compared even if they were never tested on the same day.
VS
79
/ 100
Objective (60%)
–/100
No test data yet
User signal (40%)
78/100
23 owner reviews
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
VerdictWinner: Yokohama Advan Sport V105S — better treadwear, comfort and wet. It leads or ties in every category we score.
Read full
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made via links on this page.
Category breakdown
5 categories, side by side
Each bar is the Relative Score for that category. Expand a tile to see the test results and owner ratings behind it.
Dry
Score (0–100)
Advan Sport V105S leads by 4
Why this score
| Source | Turanza T005 RFT | Advan Sport V105S |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | 89 | – |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 83 | 88 |
Wet
Score (0–100)
Advan Sport V105S leads by 6
Why this score
| Source | Turanza T005 RFT | Advan Sport V105S |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | 83 | – |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 77 | 85 |
Comfort
Score (0–100)
Advan Sport V105S leads by 11
Why this score
| Source | Turanza T005 RFT | Advan Sport V105S |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | 81 | – |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 63 | 72 |
Treadwear
Score (0–100)
Advan Sport V105S leads by 14
Why this score
| Source | Turanza T005 RFT | Advan Sport V105S |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | 66 | – |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 56 | 72 |
Handling
Score (0–100)
Why this score
| Source | Turanza T005 RFT | Advan Sport V105S |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | 76 | 76 |
| DriverReviews owners | – | 84 |
Scores at a glance
| Category | Bridgestone Turanza T005 RFT | Yokohama Advan Sport V105S |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 71 | 79 |
| Dry | 84 | 88 |
| Wet | 78 | 84 |
| Comfort | 65 | 76 |
| Treadwear | 57 | 71 |
| Handling | 76 | 76 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Personalize
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip and treadwear start at “Important” — the two things buyers rank highest. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Recomputed
Headline score
71
/ 100
Tire A
79
/ 100
Tire B
From owners
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews across retailers and review sites — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
The Bridgestone Turanza T005 RFT receives mixed feedback, often praised for its initial comfort and steering precision but frequently criticized for premature tread wear and increased noise levels as the tire ages. While many users appreciate its performance as a touring tire, the run-flat construction appears to be a polarizing feature that significantly impacts long-term ride quality and durability.
Pros
- Commendable initial ride comfort for a run-flat tire
- Responsive and direct steering feedback
- Strong dry and wet braking performance
- Low noise levels when new
Cons
- Rapid and premature tread wear
- Significant increase in road noise as the tire wears
- Susceptibility to structural damage and bulges from road impacts
- Harsh ride quality compared to non-run-flat alternatives
Observations
- BMW 3-series owners report a notable decline in ride quality and noise levels as the tires approach the end of their service life.
- Lexus UX owners have reported extreme cabin noise levels, suggesting the tire's acoustic profile may be poorly suited to certain vehicle chassis.
The Yokohama Advan Sport V105S is widely regarded as a high-performance tire that excels in steering precision, dry grip, and wet-weather confidence. While users frequently praise its responsive handling and feedback, opinions on tread longevity are polarized, with some reporting rapid wear under spirited driving conditions.
Pros
- Exceptional dry and wet surface grip
- Precise steering response and road feedback
- Progressive handling characteristics
- High value-to-performance ratio, especially when discounted
Cons
- Inconsistent tread life reported by some users
- Firm ride quality may be uncomfortable for some
- Increased road noise compared to touring-focused tires
- Limited rim protection
Observations
- Users with electric vehicles noted that the V105S can offer better longevity in the rear compared to other premium performance brands.
- Drivers transitioning from run-flat tires to the V105S reported a noticeable improvement in ride comfort and overall road manners.
- Performance enthusiasts noted that the tire's stiff sidewall is highly beneficial for track-day feedback but requires a capable chassis to fully utilize.
Specifications
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Bridgestone Turanza T005 RFT | B · Yokohama Advan Sport V105S |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer Premium Touring tires | Summer Ultra High Performance tires |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
Final verdict
Which one should you actually buy?
71
/ 100
Bridgestone
79
/ 100
Yokohama
Winner: Yokohama Advan Sport V105S — better treadwear, comfort and wet. It leads or ties in every category we score.
Pick tire B
You want the longest tread life
Yokohama Advan Sport V105S scores 71 vs 57 on treadwear.
Pick tire B
You want the most comfortable ride
Yokohama Advan Sport V105S scores 76 vs 65 on comfort.
Pick tire B
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Yokohama Advan Sport V105S scores 84 vs 78 on wet.
Pick tire B
You want the most grip on dry roads
Yokohama Advan Sport V105S scores 88 vs 84 on dry.
Tire A · Bridgestone Turanza T005 RFT
Tire B · Yokohama Advan Sport V105S
More comparisons
Also compared with
Bridgestone Turanza T005 RFT also compared with
Yokohama Advan Sport V105S also compared with
How do we compare tires?
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements) normalized against the best tire in each test and weighted toward recent tests. 40% comes from thousands of owner reviews collected from retailers and review sites. When a tire has only one of the two, we use what exists and say so.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score.