18 shops · 56 ·847+ products

Comparison: Continental UltraContact vs. Kumho Ecsta HS52 vs. Firestone Roadhawk 2 vs. Falken e.Ziex

Test Profile

Continental
UltraContact
Kumho
Ecsta HS52
Firestone
Roadhawk 2
Falken
e.Ziex
Number of tests
1
10
6
3
Best position
#7
#2
#3
#2
Average position
7.0
6.0
4.7
3.7
Latest test
2023
2026
2026
2025
Available sizes
88
109
146
36

These tyres were not tested together in the same test. The scores below are aggregated from different independent tests, so direct comparison should be taken with caution.

Wet
Continental UltraContact
75%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
79%
Firestone Roadhawk 2
86%
Falken e.Ziex
75%
Wet braking
Continental UltraContact
85%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
85%
Firestone Roadhawk 2
78%
Falken e.Ziex
87%
Aquaplaning - cross
Continental UltraContact
58%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
68%
Firestone Roadhawk 2
88%
Falken e.Ziex
61%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Continental UltraContact
71%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
77%
Firestone Roadhawk 2
95%
Falken e.Ziex
68%
Costs
Continental UltraContact
88%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
69%
Firestone Roadhawk 2
68%
Falken e.Ziex
80%
Mileage
Continental UltraContact
88%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
54%
Firestone Roadhawk 2
38%
Falken e.Ziex
60%
Comfort
Continental UltraContact
75%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
80%
Firestone Roadhawk 2
77%
Falken e.Ziex
78%
Exterior noise
Continental UltraContact
75%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
81%
Firestone Roadhawk 2
66%
Falken e.Ziex
78%
Dry
Continental UltraContact
91%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
85%
Firestone Roadhawk 2
79%
Falken e.Ziex
85%
Dry braking
Continental UltraContact
91%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
91%
Firestone Roadhawk 2
81%
Falken e.Ziex
88%

Tread pattern comparison

Continental UltraContact
Kumho Ecsta HS52
Drag to compare · Scroll to zoom · Double-click for 2×

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison

TheTyreLab.com

Free — on the App Store

GET

TheTyreLab.com

Free — on the App Store

Compare tyres, read test results and find the best prices — all in one app.

View in App Store