Segment
1. Nokian Powerproof Upper-middle2. Firestone Roadhawk Upper-middle
Comparison: Nokian Powerproof vs. Firestone Roadhawk
Table of contents:
| # | Nokian Powerproof
| Firestone Roadhawk
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R17 - R20 | R15 - R21 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
When it comes to summer tyres, two notable contenders in the field are the Nokian Powerproof and Firestone Roadhawk. Both have performed well in our tyre tests, with overall ratings of 71% and 72% respectively, but how do they stack against each other in various aspects? Let’s examine these summer tyres based on various tests and give a verdict on their strengths and weaknesses.
Starting off with the Nokian Powerproof, a summer tyre proudly made in Finland. The Powerproof holds a commendable second position out of 50 tyres tested by Autobild. The best features highlighted in this test include Dry braking, Wet braking, and Wet braking, showing the excellent control over various weather conditions. Additionally, Autobild 2022 commends Powerproof for its good aquaplaning properties and convincing dynamic wet handling. However, the tyre falls a bit short in the area of delayed steering response and stability on dry roads, and it has limited mileage. It also has a relatively high price, which might be a factor when considering overall value.
On the other hand, Firestone Roadhawk, another summer tyre, stands at the 11th position out of 50 in the same Autobild 2022 testing. Unfortunately, the test summary for this tyre isn't as detailed as for Powerproof's, and specific strengths and weaknesses were not provided. However, it must be noted that ranking 11th out of 50, is a good indicator of its strong overall performance.
When the overall performance is considered regarding our ranking percentage, Firestone Roadhawk edges slightly over the Nokian Powerproof with a 72% to the Nokian’s 71%. However, depending on specific needs and uses, potential buyers might want to consider Powerproof's better wet handling and braking or Roadhawk's presumably higher mile performance.
In conclusion, both Nokian Powerproof and Firestone Roadhawk exhibited great performance in the summer tyre category. The optimal choice between them will rest substantially on the buyer’s specific needs, driving conditions, and budget constraints.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
1. Nokian Powerproof 7.45
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Firestone Roadhawk Exemplary2. Nokian Powerproof Exemplary
Worst rating in test
1. Firestone Roadhawk Conditionally recommended2. Nokian Powerproof Conditionally recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Offroad
(Overall rating)Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Outside noise accoring to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 35,7 | 27,5 | |||||
| Nokian Powerproof | 35,7 | 28,9 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 37,7 | 32,8 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | příkladné | 1 | 1- | 1 | |||
| Nokian Powerproof Rating: Good | dobré | 1- | 2+ | 2- | |||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good | dobré | 2+ | 2 | 2- | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 32,1 | 28,7 | |||||
| Nokian Powerproof | 32,9 | 29,1 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 34,3 | 30,8 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
