Tests 72 · 6 tests Owners 52 · 5,811 reviews
Best test result: #1 of 20 in 2020 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test (wet braking)
“Had a set of run flats for a brief period, heavy tires, very stiff sidewalls, wouldn't run them again.. .”
Head-to-head
Updated
Bridgestone Potenza S001 vs Falken Azenis FK510 — Compared
Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews (comfort 40/60). Based on 6 + 31 road tests and 5,811 + 907 owner reviews. How we score
Azenis FK510 is ahead, 70–62
Add your size for an exact match
/R
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests 74 · 31 tests Owners 66 · 907 reviews
Best test result: #1 of 9 in 2018 Sport Auto 19 inch UHP and Track Day Tyre Test (wet braking)
“I have Fallen FK510s and live where it rains 300 days a year, they perform great and I'm sure the 520 is even better”
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
Key facts
- In 3 tests that measured dry braking for both, Potenza S001 won 3 and Azenis FK510 won 0 (average 96% vs 90% of the best).
- In 3 tests that measured wet braking for both, Potenza S001 won 2 and Azenis FK510 won 1 (average 95% vs 94% of the best).
-
72
Dry
Azenis FK510 +274Why this score
Source Potenza S001 Azenis FK510 Professional tests (TWG score) · 4 / 28 tests 79 73 Reviews found online 60 75 Dry Braking (% of best) · 3 shared tests · wins 3–0 96% 90% Dry Handling (% of best) · 2 shared tests · wins 1–0 99% 99% Dry Handling (tester's mark) (% of best) · 1 shared test · wins 1–0 90% 70% Potenza S001: 60% × 79.5 + 40% × 59.6 = 72
Azenis FK510: 60% × 72.9 + 40% × 75 = 74
-
75
Wet
Azenis FK510 +984Why this score
Source Potenza S001 Azenis FK510 Professional tests (TWG score) · 4 / 29 tests 85 88 Reviews found online 60 78 Straight Aquaplaning (% of best) · 2 shared tests · wins 1–0 96% 96% Wet Handling (tester's mark) (% of best) · 1 shared test · wins 1–0 78% 67% Wet Braking (% of best) · 3 shared tests · wins 2–1 95% 94% Wet Handling (% of best) · 2 shared tests · wins 1–1 98% 95% Potenza S001: 60% × 85.1 + 40% × 59.8 = 75
Azenis FK510: 60% × 88.5 + 40% × 78 = 84
-
51
Snow
Azenis FK510 +455Why this score
Source Potenza S001 Azenis FK510 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 60 (est.) ≈ 62 (est.) Reviews found online 37 45 Potenza S001: 60% × 59.6 (est.) + 40% × 36.9 = 51
Azenis FK510: 60% × 62.2 (est.) + 40% × 44.8 = 55
No road tests of snow for Potenza S001. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).
No road tests of snow for Azenis FK510. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).
-
53
Comfort
Azenis FK510 +457Why this score
Source Potenza S001 Azenis FK510 Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / 6 tests 63 41 Reviews found online 47 67 Comfort (tester's mark) (% of best) · 1 shared test · wins 1–0 70% 60% Potenza S001: 40% × 63.1 + 60% × 47 = 53
Azenis FK510: 40% × 40.7 + 60% × 67.4 = 57
-
56
Noise
Azenis FK510 +1066Why this score
Source Potenza S001 Azenis FK510 Professional tests (TWG score) · 3 / 18 tests 56 66 Reviews found online 56 67 Noise (% of best) · 2 shared tests · wins 0–2 96% 98% Potenza S001: 60% × 55.7 + 40% × 55.5 = 56
Azenis FK510: 60% × 66 + 40% × 66.9 = 66
-
52
Treadwear
Azenis FK510 +1466Why this score
Source Potenza S001 Azenis FK510 Professional tests (TWG score) · 3 / 5 tests 59 73 Reviews found online 43 55 Tested Tread Life (Miles) (% of best) · 1 shared test · wins 0–0 54% 54% Wear (% of best) · 2 shared tests · wins 0–2 74% 92% Potenza S001: 60% × 58.7 + 40% × 43.1 = 52
Azenis FK510: 60% × 73.1 + 40% × 54.5 = 66
-
60
Handling (owners)
Azenis FK510 +1272Why this score
Source Potenza S001 Azenis FK510 Reviews found online 60 72 -
41
Efficiency
Azenis FK510 +950Why this score
Source Potenza S001 Azenis FK510 Professional tests (TWG score) · 3 / 19 tests 41 50 Rolling Resistance (% of best) · 2 shared tests · wins 0–2 81% 90%
Scores at a glance
| Category | Bridgestone Potenza S001 | Falken Azenis FK510 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 62 | 70 |
| Dry | 72 | 74 |
| Wet | 75 | 84 |
| Snow | 51 | 55 |
| Comfort | 53 | 57 |
| Noise | 56 | 66 |
| Treadwear | 52 | 66 |
| Handling (owners) | 60 | 72 |
| Efficiency | 41 | 50 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip and treadwear start at “Important” — the two things buyers rank highest. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Not important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Recomputed
Headline score
62
/ 100
Potenza S001
70
/ 100
Azenis FK510
The professional test results behind the scores
Per discipline: the average % of the best tire over every test both tires were in, and how many of those tests each one won. “Different tests” rows compare results from separate tests.
In the overall rankings of 7 tests that ran both, Bridgestone Potenza S001 finished ahead 3 times and Falken Azenis FK510 4 times.
| Discipline | Category | Potenza S001 | Azenis FK510 | Δ | Head-to-head |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Braking | Dry | 96% | 90% | +5.5 | 3–0 in 3 shared tests Newest: 2020 Tyre Market Overview Braking Test · 245/45 R18 |
| Dry Handling | Dry | 99% | 99% | +0.2 | 1–0 in 2 shared tests Newest: 2020 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test · 245/45 R18 |
| Dry Handling (tester's mark) | Dry | 90% | 70% | +20.0 | 1–0 in 1 shared test Newest: 2019 Sport Auto 20 Inch UHP Tyre Test · 245/30 R20 |
| Straight Aquaplaning | Wet | 96% | 96% | +0.1 | 1–0 in 2 shared tests Newest: 2020 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test · 245/45 R18 |
| Wet Braking | Wet | 95% | 94% | +1.0 | 2–1 in 3 shared tests Newest: 2020 Tyre Market Overview Braking Test · 245/45 R18 |
| Wet Handling | Wet | 98% | 95% | +3.1 | 1–1 in 2 shared tests Newest: 2020 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test · 245/45 R18 |
| Wet Handling (tester's mark) | Wet | 78% | 67% | +11.0 | 1–0 in 1 shared test Newest: 2019 Sport Auto 20 Inch UHP Tyre Test · 245/30 R20 |
| Comfort (tester's mark) | Comfort | 70% | 60% | +10.0 | 1–0 in 1 shared test Newest: 2019 Sport Auto 20 Inch UHP Tyre Test · 245/30 R20 |
| Noise | Noise | 96% | 98% | −2.0 | 0–2 in 2 shared tests Newest: 2020 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test · 245/45 R18 |
| Tested Tread Life (Miles) | Treadwear | 54% | 54% | 0.0 | 0–0 in 1 shared test Newest: 2022 Consumer Reports Ultra High Performance Summer Tires · 215/60R18 |
| Wear | Treadwear | 74% | 92% | −18.5 | 0–2 in 2 shared tests Newest: 2020 ADAC 18 Inch Summer Tyre Test · 225/40 R18 |
| Rolling Resistance | Efficiency | 81% | 90% | −9.4 | 0–2 in 2 shared tests Newest: 2020 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test · 245/45 R18 |
| Also published by the testers (not in the score) | |||||
| Price | Cost | 54% | 65% | −10.4 | 0–1 in 1 shared test Newest: 2020 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test · 245/45 R18 |
| Total Cost of Ownership | Cost | #20/20 | #6/20 | – | 0–1 in 1 shared test Newest: 2020 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test · 245/45 R18 |
| Value | Cost | 60% | 100% | −40.3 | 0–1 in 1 shared test Newest: 2020 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test · 245/45 R18 |
| Overall Ranking | Overall | #12/22 | #5/22 | – | 3–4 in 7 shared tests Newest: 2022 Consumer Reports Ultra High Performance Summer Tires · 215/60R18 |
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A Potenza S001
Pros
- Precise and sharp steering response
- Strong dry-pavement cornering grip
- Stiff sidewalls providing robust rim protection and high-speed stability
Cons
- High levels of road noise and cabin drone
- Stiff, harsh ride quality (particularly noticeable on run-flat versions)
- Poor or unpredictable wet-weather grip and sudden loss of traction
Tire B Azenis FK510
Pros
- Outstanding grip in both wet and dry conditions
- Exceptional value and lower price point compared to premium brands
- Smooth and comfortable ride quality that absorbs road imperfections well
Cons
- Accelerated tread wear and shorter overall lifespan
- Softer sidewalls can result in slightly delayed initial steering response or a feeling of looseness during aggressive high-speed maneuvers
- Occasional reports of increased tire noise or harshness on specific rough or concrete road surfaces
What real owners are saying
From Reddit, forums and review threads. Not part of our score
Tire A
Mixed
Bridgestone Potenza S001
Community sentiment regarding the Bridgestone Potenza S001 is predominantly mixed to negative, particularly concerning the run-flat variants. Drivers frequently report stiff sidewalls, harsh ride quality, road noise, premature wear, and tread cracking, leading many to switch to non-run-flat alternatives like Michelin. However, several owners find them adequate for spirited driving, citing satisfactory dry and wet grip as well as acceptable ride comfort on specific vehicle setups.
r/TyreReviews
·3 upvotes ·2026-02-22
“Replacing Bridgestone Potenza s001 RunFlats with Primacy 5 vs. PS5. Suggestions? I drive a VW Jetta which only has 160 Hp. I do occasionally really enjoy some spirited driving or taking aggressive turns. My considerations are that I do really care about Comfort and road noise and so that leads me towards the Primacy 5. At the same time, I don't think the power of my car justifies the PS5. My question is basically, I've online that for runflats to be runflats they have really stiff sidewalls, which might be contributing to the current feel of my car and I wonder if, even though everything else about the Potenza s001 is quite worse compared to the Primacy 5, I wonder if I will miss the stiff sidewall? And just because of that should I consider the PS5?”
f30.bimmerpost.com
“Quote: Originally Posted by ProjectBoost Yeah and the Bridgestone's should be replaced too. +1 Bridgestone Potenza S001 are near the bottom of all run flat tires. If you prefer run flat tires, Pirelli P Zero are much better.”
svtperformance.com
·2 upvotes ·2023-08-06
“Had a set of run flats for a brief period, heavy tires, very stiff sidewalls, wouldn't run them again.. .”
Top themes
#run-flat stiffness and harshness#premature tread wear#tread cracking issues#wet and dry grip#switching to non-run-flats#road noise generation#OEM tire replacement
Based on 43 community posts
Tire B
Mixed
Falken Azenis FK510
Community members frequently view the Falken Azenis FK510 as an affordable, budget-friendly alternative to premium tires like Michelin Pilot Sports, offering strong wet weather grip and good everyday road comfort. However, opinions are mixed due to rapid treadwear, with multiple drivers reporting bald tires in 10,000 to 15,000 miles or poor durability during track and autocross sessions. Furthermore, some users note compromises in steering response, road noise, and overall performance compared to top-tier max performance tires.
corvetteforum.com
“I've had a set of Falken Azenis FK510's on my car for a couple of months now, and just this past weekend took a trip through the twisties up to Prescott, and pushed the car as hard as I could heading up the mountain. I was a little nervous as I'd never used Falken tires before, but trusted in Tire Rack's reviews of them and pushed the envelope in every turn I hit. It was a pleasant surprise to find that the tires were gripping just as well as the much more expensive Michelin tires they'd replaced, and I even hit a personal best of .95g going around one of the more nasty turns. During this entire drive I never felt once like the tires weren't gripping perfectly, or that I was going to lose control from them breaking loose. Road noise is pretty much non-existent, and they seem to run pretty smooth over every surface I've driven them on so far. All-in-all I don't regret my purchase one bit, and if their longevity is anything like what I got out of my previous set of Michelins I'll definitely be buying another set once this one is done for.”
r/tires
·2 upvotes ·2022-02-08
“Falken Azenis FK510 prices? Anyone know why the prices for Falken Azenis FK510's went up 25% or more in the last month? 235/40R18 went from $154 to $192. The whole benefit of these tires is that they offer PS4S performance for way less money. Now, you midaswhale just buy the Michelins. I haven't seen any other summer tires make that kind of a jump in price. I know Falken announced a price increase for 2022, but it was only like 5%. What's the dealio? Read more”
r/TeslaModel3
·1 upvote ·2024-02-10
“I put the fk510 on my 2014 535d msport and the rears only lasted 10-11k or one year. Trying something different. They are a good performance summer tire but not worth replacing every year.”
Top themes
#budget friendly pricing#wet weather traction#fast treadwear#track durability concerns#ride comfort#cabin road noise#daily street driving
Based on 63 community posts
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Bridgestone Potenza S001 | B · Falken Azenis FK510 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | 55 | 93 |
| Rim diameters | 15″ – 21″ | 17″ – 22″ |
| Tread depth | 8/32″ | 10/32″ |
| UTQG | 280 A A | 300 A A |
| Sidewall | Blackwall | Blackwall |
| Max pressure | 50 psi | 50 psi |
| Sizes in common | 42 | 42 |
Which one should you actually buy?
62
/ 100
Bridgestone Potenza S001
70
/ 100
Falken Azenis FK510
Winner: Falken Azenis FK510 — better treadwear, handling and noise. It leads or ties in every category we score.
Pick tire B
You want the longest tread life
Falken Azenis FK510 scores 66 vs 52 on treadwear.
Pick tire B
You enjoy sharp, responsive handling
Falken Azenis FK510 scores 72 vs 60 on handling.
Pick tire B
You want a quieter cabin
Falken Azenis FK510 scores 66 vs 56 on noise.
Pick tire B
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Falken Azenis FK510 scores 84 vs 75 on wet.
Pick tire A
Your priority is dry braking
Bridgestone Potenza S001 won 3 of 3 shared dry braking tests.
Tire A · Bridgestone Potenza S001
Tire B · Falken Azenis FK510
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Potenza S001 or Azenis FK510?
Which is better in the wet, Potenza S001 or Azenis FK510?
Falken Azenis FK510, 84 vs 75 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Potenza S001 or Azenis FK510?
Neither, by our numbers: 72 vs 74 on the dry score, within 3 points.
Which is better in snow, Potenza S001 or Azenis FK510?
Falken Azenis FK510, 55 vs 51 on our snow score.
Which is quieter, Potenza S001 or Azenis FK510?
Falken Azenis FK510, 66 vs 56 on our noise score.
Which is more comfortable, Potenza S001 or Azenis FK510?
Falken Azenis FK510, 57 vs 53 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, Potenza S001 or Azenis FK510?
Falken Azenis FK510, 66 vs 52 on our treadwear score.
Which rolls more easily, Potenza S001 or Azenis FK510?
Falken Azenis FK510, 50 vs 41 on our efficiency 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