Segment
1. Bridgestone Potenza Sport Premium2. Firestone Firehawk Sport Upper-middle
Comparison: Firestone Firehawk Sport vs. Bridgestone Potenza Sport
Table of contents:
| # | Firestone Firehawk Sport
| Bridgestone Potenza Sport
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R18 - R20 | R17 - R22 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
We are comparing the Firestone Firehawk Sport and Bridgestone Potenza Sport tyres, two premium products from renowned manufacturers Firestone and Bridgestone.
The Firestone Firehawk Sport, which is made in Italy, is an ultra high performance (UHP) summer tyre. It scored a rating of 76% in our tests. This tyre stands out for its good dry and wet grip, low weight and fuel consumption. However, it shows some weakness in aquaplaning resistance and higher wear rates, hence potentially lower lifespan. Its positions in mutual tests was the 7th place in the ADAC test, 9th place in the Autobild test and 4th place in the SportAuto test.
On the other hand, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport, an ultra ultra high performance (UUHP) tyre, that is made in Poland and Hungary, received a high rating of 91% in our tests. It excelled in dry grip and had good wet grip as well. It also had high projected lifespan and low tread wear. However, it was marked down for its high tyre weight and fuel consumption. It fared better in the mutual tests, getting the 2nd place in both ADAC and Autobild tests, and the 6th place in the SportAuto test.
Both tyres performed excellent in several categories. The Bridgestone Potenza Sport did particularly well in areas like wet circle cornering, wet and dry braking, and aquaplaning, among others. The Firestone Firehawk Sport, however, achieved great marks for having a lower rolling resistance, hence contributing to better fuel efficiency, but grappled with deficiencies in corner aquaplaning.
In conclusion, while the Firestone Firehawk Sport is notable for its lower weight and good dry and wet grip, it shows weaknesses in aquaplaning resistance and wear. On the flip side, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport, though marked down for its high weight, shines with its impressive dry grip, high projected lifespan, and low tread wear. Therefore, for better overall performance in mutual test situations, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport may be the more superior choice.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Bridgestone Potenza Sport Very good2. Firestone Firehawk Sport Very good
Worst rating in test
2. Firestone Firehawk Sport Satisfactory
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet handling
Aquaplaning - cross
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Wet braking
Wet circle cornering
Wet braking according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry handling
Dry braking
Comfort
(Overall rating)Comfort
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Rolling resistance
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Enviromental impact | Driving safety | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1,6 | 1,5 | |||||
| Firestone Firehawk Sport Rating: Good | 3,2 | 2,0 | |||||
| Bridgestone Potenza Sport Rating: Good | 2,8 | 1,5 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 32.6 | 27.4 | |||||
| Firestone Firehawk Sport | 34.6 | 31.1 | |||||
| Bridgestone Potenza Sport | 32.6 | 27.6 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Firestone Firehawk Sport Rating: Very good | |||||||
| Bridgestone Potenza Sport Rating: Very good | |||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2+ | 1- | |||||
| Firestone Firehawk Sport Rating: Satisfactory | 2- | 2+ | |||||
| Bridgestone Potenza Sport Rating: Outstanding | 2+ | 2+ | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
