Tests – · none yet Owners 34 · 146 reviews
Bridgestone Potenza RE050A Run Flat vs Firestone Firehawk 900 — Compared
Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews. Based on 0 + 0 road tests and 146 + 5 owner reviews. How we score
Firehawk 900 is ahead, 71–45
Add your size for an exact match
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests – · none yet Owners 73 · 5 reviews
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
46
Dry
Firehawk 900 +2369Why this score
Source Potenza RE050A Run Flat Firehawk 900 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 54 (est.) ≈ 69 (est.) Reviews found online 35 70 Potenza RE050A Run Flat: 60% × 54.4 (est.) + 40% × 34.5 = 46
Firehawk 900: 60% × 68.8 (est.) + 40% × 70.4 = 69
No road tests of dry for Potenza RE050A Run Flat. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).
No road tests of dry for Firehawk 900. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).
-
47
Wet
Firehawk 900 +2673Why this score
Source Potenza RE050A Run Flat Firehawk 900 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 52 (est.) ≈ 72 (est.) Reviews found online 39 74 Potenza RE050A Run Flat: 60% × 52.4 (est.) + 40% × 38.7 = 47
Firehawk 900: 60% × 72.3 (est.) + 40% × 74.2 = 73
No road tests of wet for Potenza RE050A Run Flat. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).
No road tests of wet for Firehawk 900. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).
-
42
Comfort
Firehawk 900 +2971Why this score
Source Potenza RE050A Run Flat Firehawk 900 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 60 (est.) ≈ 70 (est.) Reviews found online 15 74 Potenza RE050A Run Flat: 60% × 59.7 (est.) + 40% × 14.8 = 42
Firehawk 900: 60% × 69.9 (est.) + 40% × 73.7 = 71
No road tests of comfort for Potenza RE050A Run Flat or Firehawk 900. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
48
Treadwear
Firehawk 900 +2169Why this score
Source Potenza RE050A Run Flat Firehawk 900 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 56 (est.) ≈ 68 (est.) Reviews found online 35 72 Potenza RE050A Run Flat: 60% × 56.3 (est.) + 40% × 35.3 = 48
Firehawk 900: 60% × 67.6 (est.) + 40% × 72 = 69
No road tests of treadwear for Potenza RE050A Run Flat. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).
No road tests of treadwear for Firehawk 900. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).
-
29
Handling (owners)
Firehawk 900 +4776Why this score
Source Potenza RE050A Run Flat Firehawk 900 Reviews found online 29 76
Scores at a glance
| Category | Bridgestone Potenza RE050A Run Flat | Firestone Firehawk 900 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 45 | 71 |
| Dry | 46 | 69 |
| Wet | 47 | 73 |
| Comfort | 42 | 71 |
| Treadwear | 48 | 69 |
| Handling (owners) | 29 | 76 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip starts at “Important”. Treadwear starts at “Neutral” here: road tests measured it for at most one of the two tires, so it rests on owner reviews. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Potenza RE050A Run Flat
Firehawk 900
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A Potenza RE050A Run Flat
Pros
- Strong grip and predictable handling in dry conditions
- Precise steering response and high-speed cornering stability
- Good overall longevity and mileage for certain drivers on smooth highways
Cons
- Extremely harsh, rigid, and uncomfortable ride quality
- Severe tramlining and tendency to follow ruts or road imperfections
- Poor grip, reduced traction, and nervous handling in wet weather
Tire B Firehawk 900
Pros
- Reliable wet and dry traction
- Strong durability and impact resistance against potholes
- High level of ride comfort and bump absorption
Cons
- Noticeable road noise, especially at lower speeds
- Run-flat variants may be unsuitable for certain vehicle suspension setups
- Dry grip performance can degrade noticeably as the tire ages
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Bridgestone Potenza RE050A Run Flat | B · Firestone Firehawk 900 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | — | Passenger Car / Crossover |
Which one should you actually buy?
Bridgestone Potenza RE050A Run Flat
Firestone Firehawk 900
Winner: Firestone Firehawk 900 — better handling, comfort and wet. It leads or ties in every category we score. Firestone Firehawk 900 rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 5 reviews), so read this result as provisional.
Firestone Firehawk 900 scores 76 vs 29 on handling.
Firestone Firehawk 900 scores 71 vs 42 on comfort.
Firestone Firehawk 900 scores 73 vs 47 on wet.
Firestone Firehawk 900 scores 69 vs 46 on dry.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Potenza RE050A Run Flat or Firehawk 900?
Which is better in the wet, Potenza RE050A Run Flat or Firehawk 900?
Firestone Firehawk 900, 73 vs 47 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Potenza RE050A Run Flat or Firehawk 900?
Firestone Firehawk 900, 69 vs 46 on our dry score.
Which is more comfortable, Potenza RE050A Run Flat or Firehawk 900?
Firestone Firehawk 900, 71 vs 42 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, Potenza RE050A Run Flat or Firehawk 900?
Firestone Firehawk 900, 69 vs 48 on our treadwear score.
How do we compare tires?
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements), each result compared with every other tire in the same test and newer tests counting more. 40% comes from owner reviews found online, adjusted for how generously each site rates. Both use one scale: the average tested tire gets 70, the best 100. When a tire has only one of the two, the missing half is estimated from the other and the score stays closer to average; with no road test and fewer than five owner reviews it gets no score yet.
Handling is the exception: road tests measure it inside the dry and wet scores, so its own row comes from owner ratings only and starts as less important.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score. Full methodology