10 shops, 90 283 products

|

Comparison: Firestone Roadhawk vs. Kumho Ecsta HS52

Table of contents:

Summary
Wet
Dry
Costs
Mutual tests
Dimensions and prices
Buy %

In this comparison, we are comparing a tyre from a manufacturer from USA (Firestone) against a tyre from a manufacturer from South Korea (Kumho). In this particular case, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 has a better rating of 81% compared to 72% of the Firestone Roadhawk. The first tyre test of Firestone Roadhawk was done in 2018, compared to 2022 when was the Kumho Ecsta HS52 first tested. Important for this comparison is also the Autobild 2024 205/55 R16 test, where both the Roadhawk and the Ecsta HS52 were tested. See more mutual tests below.

#	Firestone Roadhawk /72%	Kumho Ecsta HS52 /81%	Add to comparison Make Model New comparison

Dimensions	R15 - R21	R14 - R18
Price	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices
Remove	Remove from comparison	Remove from comparison

Segment

1. Firestone Roadhawk Upper-middle

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Upper-middle

Number of sizes available

1. Firestone Roadhawk 148

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 88

Number of tests

1. Firestone Roadhawk 21x

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 9x

Best position in test

1. Firestone Roadhawk 2.

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 2.

Worst position in test

1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 13.

2. Firestone Roadhawk 31.

Average position in tests

1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 5.67

2. Firestone Roadhawk 11.9

Year of the last test

1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 2024

2. Firestone Roadhawk 2023

Best rating in test

1. Firestone Roadhawk Exemplary

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Good

Worst rating in test

1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Good

2. Firestone Roadhawk Conditionally recommended

Wet

(Overall rating)

Firestone
Roadhawk
82%

Kumho
Ecsta HS52
76%

Aquaplaning - cross

1. Firestone Roadhawk 85%

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 58%

Aquaplaning - longitudal

1. Firestone Roadhawk 86%

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 75%

Wet braking

1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 76%

2. Firestone Roadhawk 67%

Wet handling

1. Firestone Roadhawk 89%

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 87%

Wet circle cornering

1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 83%

2. Firestone Roadhawk 83%

Wet braking according to EU label

1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 ?

2. Firestone Roadhawk ?

Dry

(Overall rating)

Kumho
Ecsta HS52
90%

Firestone
Roadhawk
83%

Dry braking

1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 90%

2. Firestone Roadhawk 84%

Dry handling

1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 89%

2. Firestone Roadhawk 83%

Comfort

(Overall rating)

Kumho
Ecsta HS52
78%

Firestone
Roadhawk
73%

Exterior noise

1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 84%

2. Firestone Roadhawk 74%

Comfort

1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 72%

2. Firestone Roadhawk 72%

Outside noise accoring to EU label

1. Firestone Roadhawk 71 dB

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 ? dB

Costs

(Overall rating)

Firestone
Roadhawk
76%

Kumho
Ecsta HS52
69%

Mileage

1. Firestone Roadhawk 74%

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 73%

Rolling resistance

1. Firestone Roadhawk 78%

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 65%

Fuel consumption according to EU label

1. Firestone Roadhawk ?

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 ?

Add to comparison

Make

Model

Dimensions and prices

Mutual tests

Autobild Summer tyre test 2024 205/55 R16

Name
Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good
Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Good
Show test details

Autobild Summer tyre test 2024 205/55 R16

Name	Stopping distance on dry	Stopping distance on wet
Best values in test	35,4	25,8
Firestone Roadhawk	36,6	28,7
Kumho Ecsta HS52	35,4	26,1
Show test details

Autoklub ČR Summer tyre test 2023 205/55 R16

Name	Points total	Wet	Dry
Best values in test	104,7	106	103,4
Firestone Roadhawk	100	100	100
Kumho Ecsta HS52	96,9	94,3	99,5
Show test details

ADAC Summer tyre test 2023 205/55 R16

Name	Enviromental impact	Driving safety
Best values in test	1,3	1,8
Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good	2,7	2,8
Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Good	2,7	2,3
Show test details

Autobild Summer tyre test 2022 215/55 R17

Name	Stopping distance on dry	Stopping distance on wet
Best values in test	35,7	27,5
Firestone Roadhawk	37,7	32,8
Kumho Ecsta HS52	35,7	28,6
Show test details