Segment
1. Firestone Roadhawk Upper-middle2. Apollo Alnac 4G Lowcost
Comparison: Apollo Alnac 4G vs. Firestone Roadhawk
Table of contents:
| # | Apollo Alnac 4G
| Firestone Roadhawk
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R14 - R17 | R15 - R21 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
When comparing summer tyres, the Apollo Alnac 4G and Firestone Roadhawk both offer unique performances and characteristics.
The Apollo Alnac 4G, made by Apollo, rates a 46% in our tests, achieving its best position in the Autoklub ČR test: 14th out of 19. In the ADAC test, it landed a less impressive 27th place out of 50. According to an autobild 2024 review, the Alnac 4G is praised for its efficiency, however, it is criticized for its lack of balance, weaknesses on both dry and wet surfaces, poor environmental performance, and relatively low mileage and high wear.
On the other hand, the Firestone Roadhawk, produced by Firestone, scores a higher rating of 59% in our evaluations. It clinched 11th position in the Autoklub ČR test, and a more commendable 20th out of 50 in the ADAC test. This tyre shines in the autobild test, being marked as efficient, light, and well-performing on dry surfaces. However, its shortcomings are found in its unbalanced nature, poor performance on wet surfaces, and unsatisfactory mileage.
In a direct Autobild comparison, the Firestone Roadhawk clearly outperformed the Apollo Alnac 4G, achieving a 10th place compared to the Alnac's 21st out of 53. The Roadhawk was particularly noted for its dry and wet handling, as well as its wet side guide capabilities.
To summarize, the Firestone Roadhawk generally performs better in tests compared to the Apollo Alnac 4G. Its clear strengths lie in efficiency, lightness, and handling on dry surfaces, with minor weaknesses, while the Alnac 4G's greatest strength is its efficiency, but suffers from balancing issues and performance on different types of surfaces.
However, no new modelsreplace neither the Apollo Alnac 4G nor the Firestone Roadhawk, meaning that these versions remain the most up-to-date offerings from their respective manufacturers.
When choosing between these two summer tyres, prioritize your needs related to efficiency, road condition performance, and the importance of it being light.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
2. Apollo Alnac 4G 18.88
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Firestone Roadhawk Exemplary2. Apollo Alnac 4G Exemplary
Worst rating in test
1. Apollo Alnac 4G Satisfactory2. Firestone Roadhawk Conditionally recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Aquaplaning - cross
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Wet braking
Wet braking according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Points total | Wet | Dry | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 104,7 | 106 | 103,4 | ||||
| Apollo Alnac 4G | 96,7 | 97,3 | 96,1 | ||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 100 | 100 | 100 | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Enviromental impact | Driving safety | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | dobré | 1,3 | 1,8 | ||||
| Apollo Alnac 4G Rating: Good | chvalitebné | 3,5 | 3,0 | ||||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good | chvalitebné | 2,7 | 2,8 | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,1 | 29,6 | |||||
| Apollo Alnac 4G | 36,8 | 33,2 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 35,7 | 31,6 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
