• 14 shops, 56 847 products

Comparison: Nokian WetProof vs. Firestone Roadhawk

Mutual tests overview

Detailed head-to-head comparison based on actual test results

Tests used in comparison (3)

Organization Season Year Dimension Action
Autoklub ČR Autoklub ČR
Summer
2023 205/55 R16 View
Autobild Autobild
Summer
2021 205/55 R16 View
Autobild Autobild
Summer
2019 225/45 R17 View

When it comes to choosing a reliable summer tyre, it’s essential to consider key factors including efficiency, handling, and durability. This review focuses on comparing two notable options, the Nokian WetProof and Firestone Roadhawk models.


The Nokian WetProof, manufactured in Finland, boasts an overall rating of 83%. This tyre has proven itself in many tests, consistently securing a top ten position. In Autoklub ČR's test with 19 tyres, it took the 6th spot. More notably, in an ADAC test and Autobild's massive 53-tyre review, it maintained its 6th and 5th positions respectively. The Nokian WetProof's strongest features appear to be its exterior noise reduction and wet circle cornering. Reviewers praised it for its balance, and impressive performance on both dry and wet surfaces. However, it was slightly undermined by its environmental impact, tread wear, and minor sustainability issues.


On the other hand, the Firestone Roadhawk achieved an overall ranking of 72% in our tests. This tyre did not fare as well as the Nokian WetProof in mutual tests; it took 11th place in both the Autoklub ČR and ADAC tests out of 19 and 18 tyres respectively. Furthermore, in the Autobild test, it found itself in the 13th spot among 53 tyres. Best features highlighted by reviewers include dry handling, wet handling, and wet side guiding. While it fared well on dry surfaces and showed little tyre wear, it was pulled down by its less balanced performance and weaknesses on wet surfaces.


In conclusion, if one were to make a choice between the Nokian WetProof and the Firestone Roadhawk, the WetProof seems to be a stronger contender overall, despite its minor sustainability concerns. It scores better in tests, delivers balanced performance on various surfaces, and demonstrates improved exterior noise reduction and wet cornering. The Roadhawk, while efficient and lightweight with low tyre wear, falls short in wet conditions' performance and overall balance.


Visit the manufacturer’s pages for more information on Nokian and Firestone tyres. Bear in mind that while these tyres serve as good options, a tyre model's aptitude can be subject to vehicle specifications, driving style, and road conditions.

Performance comparison

Averaged from 3 tests

Wet Performance
Nokian WetProof
82%
Nokian
WetProof
Firestone Roadhawk
81%
Firestone
Roadhawk
Wet Braking
Nokian WetProof
75%
Firestone Roadhawk
68%
Wet Handling
Nokian WetProof
90%
Firestone Roadhawk
91%
Wet Circle Cornering
Nokian WetProof
94%
Firestone Roadhawk
80%
Aquaplaning Longitudinal
Nokian WetProof
80%
Firestone Roadhawk
84%
Aquaplaning Cross
Nokian WetProof
73%
Firestone Roadhawk
80%
Best: Vredestein Ultrac (100.0%)
Best in category: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 (98.3%)
Dry Performance
Nokian WetProof
84%
Nokian
WetProof
Firestone Roadhawk
86%
Firestone
Roadhawk
Dry Braking
Nokian WetProof
86%
Firestone Roadhawk
83%
Dry Handling
Nokian WetProof
81%
Firestone Roadhawk
89%
Best in category: Pirelli P ZERO (100.0%)
Comfort & Noise
Nokian WetProof
79%
Nokian
WetProof
Firestone Roadhawk
69%
Firestone
Roadhawk
Noise Exterior
Nokian WetProof
93%
Firestone Roadhawk
73%
Best: Apollo Alnac 4G (99.0%)
Ride Comfort
Nokian WetProof
64%
Firestone Roadhawk
64%
Best in category: Apollo Alnac 4G (99.0%)
Economy
Nokian WetProof
59%
Nokian
WetProof
Firestone Roadhawk
65%
Firestone
Roadhawk
Rolling Resistance
Nokian WetProof
66%
Firestone Roadhawk
77%
Mileage
Nokian WetProof
51%
Firestone Roadhawk
53%
Best in category: Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2 (94.0%)

Performance spider chart

Visual comparison of all performance categories from mutual tests.

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Loading...

Add to comparison