12 shops, 56 847 products

|

Comparison: BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 vs. Firestone Winterhawk 3

Table of contents:

Summary
Wet
Dry
Snow
Ice
Costs
Mutual tests
Dimensions and prices
Buy %

In this comparison, both of the tyres are made by a brand from USA. BFGoodrich is a brand that belongs to the Michelin group. Generally, BFGoodrich winter tyres are slightly better rated (75%) than Firestone (56%). The first tyre test of BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 was done in 2017, compared to 2015 when was the Firestone Winterhawk 3 first tested. Important for this comparison is also the Autobild 2017 225/50 R17 test, where both the G-FORCE WINTER 2 and the Winterhawk 3 were tested. See more mutual tests below. When it comes to comparison, eu labels can be also interesting - 100% of BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 has B wet grip rating, whereas 92% of Firestone Winterhawk 3 has C rating. We also know where G-FORCE WINTER 2 is made - Romania/Poland.

#	BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 /81%	Firestone Winterhawk 3 /0%	Add to comparison Make Model New comparison

Dimensions	R14 - R19	R13 - R18
Price	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices
Remove	Remove from comparison	Remove from comparison

Segment

1. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 Upper-middle

2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 Upper-middle

Number of sizes available

1. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 91

2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 66

Number of tests

1. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 23x

2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 14x

Best position in test

1. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 1.

2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 3.

Worst position in test

1. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 13.

2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 32.

Average position in tests

1. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 6.65

2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 16

Year of the last test

1. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 2025

2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 2020

Best rating in test

1. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 Very good

2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 Satisfactory

Worst rating in test

1. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 Good

2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 Conditionally recommended

Dry

(Overall rating)

Firestone
Winterhawk 3

75.8%

BFGoodrich
G-FORCE WINTER 2

71.8%

Wet

(Overall rating)

BFGoodrich
G-FORCE WINTER 2

70.3%

Firestone
Winterhawk 3

66.5%

Wet braking according to EU label

1. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 B

2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 C

Snow

(Overall rating)

BFGoodrich
G-FORCE WINTER 2

93.2%

Firestone
Winterhawk 3

81.4%

Comfort

(Overall rating)

BFGoodrich
G-FORCE WINTER 2

79.3%

Firestone
Winterhawk 3

70.3%

Outside noise accoring to EU label

1. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 ?

2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 ?

Costs

(Overall rating)

Firestone
Winterhawk 3

80.3%

BFGoodrich
G-FORCE WINTER 2

75%

Fuel consumption according to EU label

1. Firestone Winterhawk 3 E

2. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 E

Ice

(Overall rating)

Firestone
Winterhawk 3

82.7%

BFGoodrich
G-FORCE WINTER 2

80.5%

Add to comparison

Make

Model

Dimensions and prices

Mutual Tests Available

These tyres were tested together in 2 test(s). Click to view detailed head-to-head results.

Mutual tests

Autobild

Autobild Winter tyre test 2017 225/50 R17

Name	Wet	Dry	Snow	Running costs
Best values in test	2+	2+	1	2+
BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 Rating: Good	2	2-	1	2
Firestone Winterhawk 3 Rating: Satisfactory	3+	2	2	2-
Show test details

Autobild

Autobild Winter tyre test 2017 225/50 R17

Name	Stopping distance on wet	Stopping distance on snow
Best values in test	32,2	25,9
BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2	35,1	25,9
Firestone Winterhawk 3	36,3	27,9
Show test details