Comparison: BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER vs. Firestone Roadhawk vs. Hankook ION Evo

Upper-middle

BFGoodrich

ACTIVAN WINTER

R14 – R16

VS

Upper-middle

Firestone

Roadhawk

ION Evo

9.0

R17 – R22

Also compare with

PremiumContact 7

Pilot Sport 5

Efficientgrip 2 SUV

Test Profile

ACTIVAN WINTER

Roadhawk

ION Evo

Number of tests

1

21

1

Best position

#13

#2

#1

Average position

13.0

11.9

1.0

Latest test

2019

2024

2025

Available sizes

15

164

64

Wet

Firestone Roadhawk

71%

Hankook ION Evo

89%

Aquaplaning - longitudal

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

56%

Firestone Roadhawk

79%

Hankook ION Evo

77%

Wet braking

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

40%

Firestone Roadhawk

67%

Hankook ION Evo

97%

Wet circle cornering

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

61%

Firestone Roadhawk

78%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

Wet handling

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

23%

Firestone Roadhawk

74%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

Aquaplaning - cross

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

67%

Firestone Roadhawk

72%

Hankook ION Evo

87%

Dry

Firestone Roadhawk

85%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

Dry braking

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

82%

Firestone Roadhawk

83%

Hankook ION Evo

91%

Dry driving behavior

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

53%

Firestone Roadhawk

75%

Comfort

Firestone Roadhawk

71%

Hankook ION Evo

72%

Exterior noise

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

71%

Firestone Roadhawk

62%

Hankook ION Evo

66%

Interior noise

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

60%

Firestone Roadhawk

77%

Costs

Firestone Roadhawk

70%

Hankook ION Evo

71%

Mileage

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

89%

Firestone Roadhawk

64%

Hankook ION Evo

82%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Comparison: BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER vs. Firestone Roadhawk vs. Hankook ION Evo

ACTIVAN WINTER

Roadhawk

ION Evo

Test Profile

Wet

Dry

Comfort

Costs

Dimensions and prices

Add to comparison