Segment
1. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Upper-middle2. Firestone Roadhawk Upper-middle
Comparison: Kleber Dynaxer HP4 vs. Firestone Roadhawk
Table of contents:
| # | Kleber Dynaxer HP4
| Firestone Roadhawk
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R14 - R17 | R15 - R21 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
In this article, we will compare the Kleber Dynaxer HP4 and the Firestone Roadhawk. Both are summer tyres from reputable manufacturers, Kleber and Firestone respectively. Via a thorough analysis of several tests, we will determine their strengths, weaknesses and overall performance.
The Kleber Dynaxer HP4 received an 82% rating from our review team. This tyre was noted for its comfort and low exterior noise in the Autobild test, making it a great option for those who value a peaceful ride. In the ADAC test, it received commendations for good performance on dry road and low fuel consumption, making it an economical choice. However, it was criticised for its slightly increased wear and performance on wet roads. The issues with wet surface grip also came to light in the Autobild 2024 test, offsetting its good environmental and efficiency scores.
On the other hand, the Firestone Roadhawk scored slightly lower at 72%. The Autobild test commended the Firestone for its excellent handling on both wet and dry roads, but identified a slight weakness in terms of tyre wear and balance. Similarly, the ADAC test highlighted its low fuel consumption, but criticised the tyre's performance on dry and wet roads and noted its slightly increased wear. In the Autobild 2024 test, despite its efficiency and low wear, the Firestone Roadhawk was again criticised for its handling on wet surfaces and its overall balance.
Overall, the Kleber Dynaxer HP4 comes out on top. It outranked the Firestone Roadhawk in the mutual tests - 14th out of 53 in Autobild and 11th out of 17 in ADAC. In the ACE test, it also secured the 6th place out of 9. Its consistently high scores for comfort and low exterior noise make it a reliable choice for most.
However, it's worth noting that the Firestone Roadhawk held its own, particularly in the Autobild test, where it secured 10th position. With its notable attributes being its handling, particularly when dry, and low rolling resistance, this tyre could still be a good choice for some drivers depending on their specific requirements.
Ultimately, both tyres offer their own strengths and weaknesses. It's advised to consider your driving style, typical road conditions and personal preferences when choosing the best tyre for your vehicle.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
1. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 11.58
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)Wet braking
Aquaplaning - cross
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Wet handling
Wet circle cornering
Wet braking according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
Dry handling
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Mileage
Rolling resistance
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Rating | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | příkladné | ||||||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Good | dobré | ||||||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good | dobré | ||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 35,4 | 25,8 | |||||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 | 37,4 | 28,8 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 36,6 | 28,7 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Enviromental impact | Driving safety | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | dobré | 1,3 | 1,8 | ||||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Good | chvalitebné | 2,1 | 2,8 | ||||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good | chvalitebné | 2,7 | 2,8 | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | dobré | 2,1 | 1,5 | 2,4 | 1,0 | 1,2 | |
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 2,7 | 1,5 | 2,8 | 1,5 | 1,9 | |
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 2,9 | 2,2 | 3,0 | 2,0 | 2,3 | |
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | příkladné | 1- | 2+ | 1 | |||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 2- | 2 | 2- | |||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good | dobré | 2+ | 2+ | 3 | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,1 | 29,6 | |||||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 | 36,2 | 31,6 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 35,7 | 31,6 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Noise | Wear | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | dobré | 2,0 | 1,5 | 2,6 | 1,5 | ||
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 3,1 | 2,3 | 2,9 | 2,5 | ||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Poor | nedostatečné | 4,9 | 2,8 | 3,0 | 2,5 | ||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Rolling resistance | Noise | Running costs | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | velmi doporučeno | 61 | 56 | 20 | 8 | 18 | |
| Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Conditionally recommended | podmíněně doporučeno | 45 | 47 | 17 | 8 | 12 | |
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Conditionally recommended | podmíněně doporučeno | 43 | 44 | 20 | 5 | 14 | |
| Show test details | |||||||