I have tried PS2's, RE11, and 3 sets of RE71R ( by far the best 'street' tire) PS4 not sure about but I imagine the RE71R is better + will wear out faster
Here is the only true comparative testing out there on the RE71R (reining track/street tire) vs. the Michelin Pilot Sport 4S (heir to the Super Sport, and clearly the best street tire for a decade). It supports what you are saying, but the margins are SLIM!! And the 4S does everything pretty well, esp. for a tire with such good longevity, and in the wet, it's a virtual tie, even though the RE71R is hands down the best extreme performance tire in the wet among the four tested, the 4S is slightly better if the road is wet - something I'm not surprised by at this point, seeing what the M3P does in the rain. So, in other words, the 4S (and fin some instances the Conti) can beat the extreme performance tires in the rain. Not surprising if the latter group is optimized for dry track performance. The other thing that is rather surprising is that although all of the extreme performance tires dropkick the street tires in Max cornering loads (on average about a 10th of a G better which is really a lot) their track times are only fractionally better. That's interesting, and it suggests that Max cornering, while we tend to associate it with great track times, may be overrated. Even more surprising the Bridgestone RD 71R surpasses the Michelin 4S in both wet cornering and wet braking, but lags behind it in wet track time. What accounts for that? I have to confess that the real head scratcher, but it may be that the Michelin just has better feedback in some fashion and that allows the driver to keep it closer to its limits. The other thing that's a bit bizarre is all the extreme performance tires have exactly the same skid pad number? That seems just plain weird, and hard to explain unless maybe their lateral G meter is maxed out at 1G. Anyway, it's pretty interesting data, and generated apparently on virtually identical BMW Three Series Coupes. Tire Rack deserves a lot of credit for bringing some form of objective testing to the tire wars. Subjective and anecdotal reports are not data and are not a basis for making a judgment about quality or performance.
One might argue however that these data sets have an uncertain application to an all-wheel-drive car like the Tesla Model 3 P on the track because there in many ways one of the most critical variables for the Model 3P is how much traction the car/tire can generate out of corners. And this is where the Model 3 might have a huge advantage over even a BMW M3 – because its drive/acceleration load is shared (and also computer distributed) across all four wheels, it should smoke an M3 accelerating out of the slower corners even if the M3 has limited slip differential – a primitive and now out of date solution. And another issue is that its instant on torque may mean that drivers have to get 'recalibrated' in terms of how they approach acceleration. In a conventional drivetrain driven by an internal combustion engine, acceleration lag is something that drivers may unconsciously compensate for, but that compensation would actually impair potentially the performance and track numbers of the Model 3P. So you might have to unlearn some things to really get the Model 3P around the track in a best possible time. Over time, at least in theory, an all-wheel-drive car with instant acceleration should be easier to drive fast and close to its limits compared to a conventional ICE car with rear wheel drive, especially if you add something like turbo lag.
In case anyone's forgotten or doesn't fully understand the basic principles, your cornering load and your acceleration and braking loads are competitive in relationship to how much of the total traction envelope of a given tire they might capture and thereby exclude the competing partner. In other words, high levels of cornering close to the limits of the tire mean that the tire has no acceleration or braking envelope left, and if the driver tries to add braking or acceleration to the borderline-overloaded tire traction picture, they will break the tire loose, with anywhere from moderately bad to disastrous results (slower time, spin out, crash). Intuitively of course I'm sure everybody here understands this, but it merits spelling out because it has some really major implications for track performance. As I've tried to point out to one somewhat recalcitrant forum member, once your tire breaks loose, your traction envelope actually crashes and is a fraction of its maximum, and can only be rebooted after the tire stops sliding completely. Obviously, the amazing art and skill in race car driving is keeping your traction loads as close to the maximum envelope capacity as you can in every corner and in braking and accelerating out of every corner, sensing when you're bumping up against the limit at least in one tire, and staying inside that traction envelope, and virtually never exceeding it. Of course, what happens when you exceed that traction envelope in one tire is that those traction envelope forces are immediately passed on to the other three tires, typically overloading them rather quickly, and provoking a slide/spin out. People who can accurately sense and thereby exploit the max traction envelope without exceeding it make millions of dollars from such a skill.
In relationship to all-wheel-drive and racing, this ability to distribute acceleration loads across four instead of just two wheels is why all-wheel-drive cars are outlawed in almost all forms of car racing. They're simply so much better it's just unfair, And that again is due simply to the competitive dynamics between breaking/acceleration forces and cornering forces. And that's why at least in my opinion the upside of the Model 3 P is so great and its potential so high. I think on a short course with bigger tires, where it could really take advantage of its better ability to accelerate while tires were loaded by cornering forces, it could challenge a Ferrari 458. At least until its battery and motor started to get hot.