18 Shops · 56,847+ Products

Comparison: Firestone Destination HP vs. GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2 vs. Continental UltraContact NXT vs. Falken e.Ziex

Test Profile

Firestone
Destination HP
GoodYear
Efficientgrip Performance 2
Continental
UltraContact NXT
Falken
e.Ziex
Number of tests
1
3
2
3
Best position
#3
#2
#1
#2
Average position
3.0
3.3
1.0
3.7
Latest test
2017
2026
2025
2025
Available sizes
35
40
23
34

Wet

Wet
Firestone Destination HP
74%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
77%
Continental UltraContact NXT
56%
Falken e.Ziex
75%
Aquaplaning - cross
Firestone Destination HP
78%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
69%
Continental UltraContact NXT
68%
Falken e.Ziex
61%
Wet handling
Firestone Destination HP
61%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
74%
Continental UltraContact NXT
45%
Falken e.Ziex
69%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Firestone Destination HP
83%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
66%
Continental UltraContact NXT
65%
Falken e.Ziex
68%
Wet braking
Firestone Destination HP
80%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
78%
Continental UltraContact NXT
51%
Falken e.Ziex
87%
Wet circle cornering
Firestone Destination HP
64%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
61%
Continental UltraContact NXT
1%
Falken e.Ziex
77%

Comfort

Comfort
Firestone Destination HP
73%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
70%
Continental UltraContact NXT
44%
Falken e.Ziex
78%
Exterior noise
Firestone Destination HP
62%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
67%
Continental UltraContact NXT
42%
Falken e.Ziex
78%

Dry

Dry
Firestone Destination HP
92%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
75%
Continental UltraContact NXT
75%
Falken e.Ziex
85%

Costs

Costs
Firestone Destination HP
67%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
83%
Continental UltraContact NXT
88%
Falken e.Ziex
80%
Mileage
Firestone Destination HP
60%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
99%
Falken e.Ziex
60%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison