Segment
1. Firestone Roadhawk Upper-middle2. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Upper-middle
Comparison: Firestone Roadhawk vs. Kleber Dynaxer HP4
Table of contents:
| # | Firestone Roadhawk | Kleber Dynaxer HP4 | Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R14 - R17 | ||
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
In this comparison, we will be examining the performance of two summer tyres: the Firestone Roadhawk and the Kleber Dynaxer HP4. Both tyres are products of reputable manufacturers, Firestone and Kleber, respectively.
According to our rating system, the Firestone Roadhawk has a rating of 71%, while the Kleber Dynaxer HP4 scores higher at 78%. Let’s take a closer look at the strengths and weaknesses of each tyre, as well as their overall performance in various tests.
Firestone Roadhawk
Among the numerous tests conducted, the Firestone Roadhawk consistently performed well in terms of dry handling, wet handling, and wet side guide. Its best features include low rolling resistance and excellent efficiency. However, it has some notable weaknesses, such as poor performance on wet surfaces and slightly increased wear.
In the ADAC test, the Firestone Roadhawk ranked 17th out of 17 tested tyres. Autobild 2018 test results highlighted the tyre's strengths on dry surfaces and commended its low wear and high efficiency, but criticized its performance on wet surfaces and reduced lifespan. In Autobild's 2021 test, the Roadhawk's low fuel consumption was praised, while its weaknesses on dry and wet roads were pointed out. Finally, in the ACE test, the Roadhawk came in 7th out of 9 tyres, with its rolling resistance being its top feature.
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
Compared to the Firestone Roadhawk, the Kleber Dynaxer HP4 has a stronger overall performance, with a particular focus on environmental factors. Its best features are exterior noise reduction and good efficiency. However, it shares similar weaknesses with the Roadhawk in terms of wet surface performance.
In the ADAC test, the Dynaxer HP4 ranked 11th out of 17 tyres and was praised for its low exterior noise. Autobild 2018 test results lauded its eco-friendliness, good lifespan, and low wear, while pointing out its poor wet surface performance. The ADAC 2021 test further praised its performance on dry surfaces and low fuel consumption, but criticized its increased wear and wet surface issues. In the ACE test, the Dynaxer HP4 ranked 6th out of 9 tyres, with exterior noise being its standout feature.
Conclusion
Overall, the Kleber Dynaxer HP4 appears to be the stronger choice between the two tyres due to its higher rating, better environmental performance, and higher placements in mutual tests. However, both the Dynaxer HP4 and the Firestone Roadhawk have areas where they could improve, particularly their performance on wet surfaces. While both tyres have their own strengths and weaknesses, the differences in their performance should be kept in mind when choosing the best tyre for your needs.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
2. Firestone Roadhawk 12.21
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Firestone Roadhawk Exemplary2. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Highly recommended
Worst rating in test
1. Firestone Roadhawk Conditionally recommended2. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Conditionally recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Aquaplaning - cross
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Wet handling
Wet braking
Wet braking according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
Outside noise accoring to EU label
1. Firestone Roadhawk 71 dB
Costs
(Overall rating)Mileage
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Enviromental impact | Driving safety | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1,3 | 1,8 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good | 2,7 | 2,8 | |||||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Good | 2,1 | 2,8 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2,1 | 1,5 | 2,4 | 1,0 | 1,2 | ||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Satisfactory | 2,9 | 2,2 | 3,0 | 2,0 | 2,3 | ||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Satisfactory | 2,7 | 1,5 | 2,8 | 1,5 | 1,9 | ||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Running costs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1- | 2+ | 1 | ||||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good | 2+ | 2+ | 3 | ||||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Satisfactory | 2- | 2 | 2- | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,1 | 29,6 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 35,7 | 31,6 | |||||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 | 36,2 | 31,6 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Noise | Wear | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2,0 | 1,5 | 2,6 | 1,5 | |||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Poor | 4,9 | 2,8 | 3,0 | 2,5 | |||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Satisfactory | 3,1 | 2,3 | 2,9 | 2,5 | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Rolling resistance | Noise | Running costs | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 61 | 56 | 20 | 8 | 18 | ||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Conditionally recommended | 43 | 44 | 20 | 5 | 14 | ||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Conditionally recommended | 45 | 47 | 17 | 8 | 12 | ||
| Show test details | |||||||