Vergleich: Firestone Roadhawk gegen Kumho Ecsta HS52 gegen GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2 gegen BFGoodrich Advantage

Obere-Mittelklasse

Firestone

Roadhawk

VS

Auch vergleichen mit

PremiumContact 7

Turanza T005

Efficient Grip Performance 2

Testprofil

Roadhawk

Ecsta HS52

Efficientgrip Performance 2

Advantage

Anzahl der Tests

21

9

—

13

Optimale Position

#2

—

#8

Durchschnittliche Position

11.9

5.7

—

13.6

Neuester Test

2024

—

2025

Verfügbare Größen

161

104

—

146

Nass

Firestone Roadhawk

71%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

77%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

77%

BFGoodrich Advantage

61%

Aquaplaning - quer

Firestone Roadhawk

72%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

66%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

69%

BFGoodrich Advantage

53%

Aquaplaning - längs

Firestone Roadhawk

79%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

73%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

66%

BFGoodrich Advantage

61%

Handling - nass

Firestone Roadhawk

74%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

79%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

74%

BFGoodrich Advantage

57%

Nassbremsen

Firestone Roadhawk

67%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

80%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

78%

BFGoodrich Advantage

77%

Kreisbahn nass

Firestone Roadhawk

78%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

89%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

61%

BFGoodrich Advantage

69%

Seitenführung

Firestone Roadhawk

92%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

100%

BFGoodrich Advantage

54%

Trocken

Firestone Roadhawk

85%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

87%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

75%

BFGoodrich Advantage

72%

Trockenbremsen

Firestone Roadhawk

83%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

89%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

77%

BFGoodrich Advantage

76%

Handling - trocken

Firestone Roadhawk

88%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

85%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

77%

BFGoodrich Advantage

80%

Lenkreaktion - trocken

Firestone Roadhawk

75%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

65%

BFGoodrich Advantage

70%

Komfort

Firestone Roadhawk

71%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

77%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

70%

BFGoodrich Advantage

79%

Außengeräusch

Firestone Roadhawk

62%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

73%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

67%

BFGoodrich Advantage

68%

Komfort

Firestone Roadhawk

72%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

71%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

59%

BFGoodrich Advantage

87%

Innengeräusche

Firestone Roadhawk

77%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

71%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

73%

BFGoodrich Advantage

81%

Kosten

Firestone Roadhawk

70%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

76%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

83%

BFGoodrich Advantage

68%

Kilometerstand

Firestone Roadhawk

64%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

79%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

99%

BFGoodrich Advantage

63%

Rollwiderstand

Firestone Roadhawk

74%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

70%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

72%

BFGoodrich Advantage

66%

Preis-Wert

Firestone Roadhawk

61%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

97%

BFGoodrich Advantage

65%

Kraftstoffverbrauch

Firestone Roadhawk

78%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

94%

BFGoodrich Advantage

93%

Abmessungen und Preise

Preise in allen verfügbaren reifendimensionen dieser reifen vergleichen.

Vergleich: Firestone Roadhawk gegen Kumho Ecsta HS52 gegen GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2 gegen BFGoodrich Advantage

Roadhawk

Ecsta HS52

Efficientgrip Performance 2

Advantage

Testprofil

Nass

Trocken

Komfort

Kosten

Abmessungen und Preise

Zum Vergleich hinzufügen