Segment
2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 Upper-middle
In this comparison, we are comparing a tyre from a manufacturer from South Korea (Hankook) against a tyre from a manufacturer from USA (Firestone). Generally, Hankook winter tyres are slightly better rated (83%) than Firestone (60%). But when it comes to comparing Hankook Winter i*cept evo2 W320 and Firestone Winterhawk 3, the rating is the same - 0%. Important for this comparison is also the Autobild 2017 225/50 R17 test, where both the Winter i*cept evo2 W320 and the Winterhawk 3 were tested. See more mutual tests below. When it comes to comparison, eu labels can be also interesting - 85% of Hankook Winter i*cept evo2 W320 dimensions has C wet grip rating. Most (92%) of the Firestone Winterhawk 3 also have C wet ratings. We also know where Winter i*cept evo2 W320 is made - Hungary.
# | Hankook Winter i*cept evo2 W320
| Firestone Winterhawk 3
| Add to comparison |
---|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ||
Dimensions | R15 - R22 | R13 - R18 | |
Price | |||
Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 Upper-middle
1. Firestone Winterhawk 3 Satisfactory2. Hankook Winter i*cept evo2 W320 Satisfactory
1. Hankook Winter i*cept evo2 W320 Still recommended2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 Conditionally recommended
Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Running costs | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Best values in test | 2+ | 2+ | 1 | 2+ | |||
Hankook Winter i*cept evo2 W320 Rating: Satisfactory | 2- | 2 | 3+ | 2 | |||
Firestone Winterhawk 3 Rating: Satisfactory | 3+ | 2 | 2 | 2- | |||
Show test details |
Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Ice | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Best values in test | 2,3 | 2,1 | 1,7 | 2,0 | 2,8 | 1,5 | 1,5 |
Hankook Winter i*cept evo2 W320 Rating: - | 3,0 | 2,2 | 2,5 | 2,4 | 3,5 | 2,5 | 2,3 |
Firestone Winterhawk 3 Rating: - | 3,0 | 2,9 | 2,4 | 2,0 | 2,8 | 2,0 | 2,2 |
Show test details |