Segment
1. Firestone Roadhawk Upper-middle2. Sava Intensa UHP 2 Lowcost
Comparison: Sava Intensa UHP 2 vs. Firestone Roadhawk
Table of contents:
| # | Sava Intensa UHP 2
| Firestone Roadhawk
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R17 - R20 | R15 - R21 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
Here we compare two popular summer tyres, the Sava Intensa UHP 2 and the Firestone Roadhawk. Both tyres have their strengths and weaknesses making them suitable for different drivers' needs.
One key element to note is that the Sava Intensa UHP 2, which was rated 73% by us, has superseded the previous Sava Intensa UHP model. We haven't yet identified a newer model that replaces this tyre. The Sava Intensa UHP 2 excelled in a number of categories in various tests. Particularly, it held a solid position 17 out of 53 in the Autobild test, impressing with its value for money and performance in cross aquaplaning scenarios. Additionally, it ranked second in the ACE test, where it gained recognition for its dry handling ability, objective dry handling, wet circle cornering, objective wet handling, and its exterior noise.
On the contrary, in the ADAC test, the Sava Intensa UHP 2 secured the 12th position. Its strengths included good performance on dry road surfaces and lower exterior noise. However, it demonstrated a slight increase in tyre wear and weaknesses on wet surfaces.
Coming over to the Firestone Roadhawk, this tyre received a rating of 72% from us. It acquired the 13th position in the Autobild test. In the same test, it didn't have any particular features stand out, however, it secured 7th position in the ACE competition due to its low rolling resistance. Yet, it came last in the ADAC test where it presented weaknesses on dry road surfaces and a slightly increased wear. These tests made evident its excellent fuel efficiency but noted it struggled on wet surfaces.
In conclusion, both tyres exhibited different strengths and weaknesses. The Sava Intensa UHP 2 is a great option for those looking for good handling and a quieter ride. While the Firestone Roadhawk is more suited to those prioritizing fuel efficiency and low rolling resistance. Keep in mind that the Roadhawk might not be the best option for areas with frequent wet weather conditions due to its lower performance on wet surfaces.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
1. Sava Intensa UHP 2 11.31
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Firestone Roadhawk Exemplary2. Sava Intensa UHP 2 Satisfactory
Worst rating in test
1. Firestone Roadhawk Conditionally recommended2. Sava Intensa UHP 2 Still recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Outside noise accoring to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 58.1 | 24.8 | |||||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 | 61.7 | 27.4 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 67.7 | 30.9 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 35,7 | 27,5 | |||||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 | 36,3 | 29,8 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 37,7 | 32,8 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Noise | Wear | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | dobré | 2,0 | 1,5 | 2,6 | 1,5 | ||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 3,1 | 2,0 | 2,6 | 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 | |
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 Rating: Recommended | doporučeno | 56 | 47 | 17 | 8 | 18 | |
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Conditionally recommended | podmíněně doporučeno | 43 | 44 | 20 | 5 | 14 | |
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 32,1 | 28,7 | |||||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 | 34,7 | 35,5 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 34,3 | 30,8 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | příkladné | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 Rating: Good | dobré | 2- | 2+ | 1- | |||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 3+ | 2- | 2- | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,2 | 28,7 | |||||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 | 35,7 | 32,8 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 35,2 | 32 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||