Head-to-head Updated

Continental EcoContact 6 vs Firestone RoadHawk — Compared

Relative Score (0–100): 60% professional tests, 40% owner reviews.

EcoContact 6 leads, 61–60 Narrow edge

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.

EcoContact 6

Summer

Tests 71 · 6 tests Owners 49 · 3,232 reviews

Best test result: #1 of 10 in 2022 ViBilagare Eco vs Normal Tyre Test (fuel consumption)

“Continental tyres falling apart Thoughts on this? Continental EcoContact 6 on a Ford Focus hatch, covered 10k miles of mild to moderate driving and both fronts are covered in chunks like the photos. Can’t recall driving on any particular surface or road recently that would have caused such damage. Date stamp is 2423 so almost bang on two years old. Looks like delamination to me but I’m no expert. Anyone seen anything like this before? Read more”

Tire BFirestone

RoadHawk

Summer

Tests 70 · 17 tests Owners 48 · 644 reviews

Best test result: #6 of 50 in 2023 ADAC Summer Tyre Test (straight aqua)

“Not sure if it is what you are looking for. I am Polish but I live in the USA. I am still following info from Poland but I am not buying tires there anymore. A magazine Motor tests tires. magazynauto.pl Firestone was included in their "accessibly priced" summer tires: Firestone Roadhawk. They lost to Uniroyal, Semperit, Dębica but were ahead of Kumho, Apollo, Tomket, Imperial and Double Coin. They were not included in their premium and middle priced test. German based Auto Bild (and its Polish version Auto Świat) did a test in 2019 and the same Roadhawk passed the elimination test (53 down to 20: wet and dry braking distances added together as #13) and finished #18 in detailed test. So Firestone is present in Poland and Europe as a cheaper brand from Bridgestone but how popular it is I do not know. Krzyś”

Category by category

Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.

  1. 65

    Dry

    RoadHawk +5
    70
    Why this score
    SourceEcoContact 6RoadHawk
    Professional tests (TWG score)7681
    Reviews found online4953
    Dry Braking (% of best)95%94%
    Dry Handling (% of best)100%99%
  2. 53

    Wet

    RoadHawk +15
    68
    Why this score
    SourceEcoContact 6RoadHawk
    Professional tests (TWG score)5376
    Reviews found online5455
    Wet Braking (% of best)98%83%
    Wet Handling (% of best)94%91%
  3. 63

    Comfort

    EcoContact 6 +4
    59
    Why this score
    SourceEcoContact 6RoadHawk
    Professional tests (TWG score)–67
    Reviews found online5747
  4. 81

    Noise

    EcoContact 6 +35
    46
    Why this score
    SourceEcoContact 6RoadHawk
    Professional tests (TWG score)9032
  5. 63

    Treadwear

    EcoContact 6 +9
    54
    Why this score
    SourceEcoContact 6RoadHawk
    Professional tests (TWG score)7765
    Reviews found online4138
  6. 50

    Handling

    EcoContact 6 +7
    43
    Why this score
    SourceEcoContact 6RoadHawk
    Reviews found online5043
Scores at a glance
Continental EcoContact 6 vs Firestone RoadHawk: scores by category (0–100)
CategoryContinental EcoContact 6Firestone RoadHawk
Relative Score 61 60
Dry 65 70
Wet 53 68
Comfort 63 59
Noise 81 46
Treadwear 63 54
Handling 50 43

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
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Less important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Less important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Recomputed
Headline score

EcoContact 6

RoadHawk

The professional test results behind the scores

Each result is shown as % of the best tire in that test. “Same test” rows are the strictest comparison: both tires were measured side by side.

DisciplineCategoryEcoContact 6RoadHawkΔBoth?
Curved Aquaplaning Curved 67% #8/8 · 2026 Summer ECO Tyre Test 92% #8/20 · 2024 AutoBild Summer Tyre Test −25.2 Different tests
Dry Braking Dry 95% #9/10 · 2022 AZ SUV Tyre Test 94% #12/49 · 2020 Tyre Market Overview Braking Test +1.7 Different tests
Dry Handling Dry 100% #3/10 · 2022 AZ SUV Tyre Test 99% #9/20 · 2020 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test +1.2 Different tests
Rolling Resistance Efficiency 87% #3/10 · 2022 ViBilagare Eco vs Normal Tyre Test 76% #15/20 · 2018 Auto Bild 15 inch Summer Tyre Test +10.7 Different tests
Fuel Consumption Fuel 100% #1/10 · 2022 ViBilagare Eco vs Normal Tyre Test 93% #47/50 · 2023 ADAC Summer Tyre Test +6.8 Different tests
Noise Other 100% #2/8 · 2026 Summer ECO Tyre Test 97% #20/20 · 2024 AutoBild Summer Tyre Test +3.0 Different tests
Price Other 63% #6/10 · 2022 ViBilagare Eco vs Normal Tyre Test 84% #8/20 · 2019 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test −21.3 Different tests
Value Other 75% #16/21 · 2022 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test 74% #7/20 · 2024 AutoBild Summer Tyre Test +0.5 Different tests
Wear Other 100% #1/12 · 2020 ADAC SUV Summer Tyre Test 65% #16/20 · 2019 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test +34.5 Different tests
Overall Ranking Overall 5% #21/44 · 2022 Summer Tyre Market Overview 4% #27/44 · 2022 Summer Tyre Market Overview +1.1 Same test
Straight Aqua Straight 92% #9/10 · 2022 ViBilagare Eco vs Normal Tyre Test 96% #6/50 · 2023 ADAC Summer Tyre Test −4.9 Different tests
Total Cost of Ownership Total 0% #1/21 · 2022 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test 0% #3/20 · 2024 AutoBild Summer Tyre Test 0.0 Different tests
Wet Braking Wet 98% #6/10 · 2022 AZ SUV Tyre Test 83% #11/14 · 2018 New and Worn Summer Tyre Test +15.1 Different tests
Wet Handling Wet 94% #8/8 · 2026 Summer ECO Tyre Test 91% #16/20 · 2020 Auto Zeitung Summer Tyre Test +3.1 Different tests

Pros, cons & observations

Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.

Tire A EcoContact 6

Pros

  • Excellent fuel efficiency and low rolling resistance
  • Low road noise and high cabin comfort
  • Good dry grip and stable handling under normal driving conditions

Cons

  • Rapid and premature tread wear, especially on drive wheels
  • Subpar wet-weather grip and high susceptibility to aquaplaning
  • Shallow initial tread depth out of the box (approx. 6.0-6.5mm)
All owner themes in the EcoContact 6 review

Tire B RoadHawk

Pros

  • Exceptional wet weather performance, particularly in standing water and heavy rain
  • Strong dry grip and confident cornering for daily driving
  • Comfortable ride quality with good bump absorption

Cons

  • Accelerated and sometimes uneven tread wear, resulting in shorter-than-expected lifespan
  • Soft sidewalls that can cause a visual 'under-inflated' bulge and spongy cornering response
  • Limited steering feedback and precision during spirited driving
All owner themes in the RoadHawk review

What real owners are saying

From Reddit, forums and review threads. Not part of our score

Tire A

Continental EcoContact 6

Negative

Community sentiment regarding the Continental Eco Contact 6 is overwhelmingly negative, with users frequently criticizing its poor wet weather grip, braking performance, and handling. While praised occasionally for low rolling resistance and energy efficiency, owners repeatedly report premature tread wear, cracking, and chunking or delamination under normal driving conditions.

r/TyreReviews ·6 upvotes ·2026-03-20

“use up factory tires or replace them? asking for come clarity of mind. my (electric) car's factory tires are "not great", just ecocontact 6's that put efficiency over everything else basically, they are not directional and will probably last a long while because they are so hard. this winter i bought a set of pirelli winter 3's for my trip to norway but also for winter in general. those tires preform better on litteral ice than the ecocontact's do in the rain. its a striking difference. the pirellis handled a 13% incline of ice brilliantly and even actual blizzard conditions. (both i got on video as people didnt believe me) i am genuinely amazed what modern winter tires can do. but i am a bit torn on the choice between getting rid of basically brand new tires (they only did about 5k) and replacing them with something decent for the summer and having tires that actually work when its wet or stop when i need them to or keep driving them until the ones i got are worn out. to be clear, i dont give a crap about the effiicency or really the lifespan of tires. braking and wet performance is vastly more important to me than saving a Watt. saving energy nor lifespan isnt a great comfort when i'm sliding into another car or tree. would getting something decent make such a big difference to warrant the cost and waste or am i better off to just run these down first? edit: sidenote, the car in question is a Renault 5. its got a pretty weird tire size (195/55R18) that limits options a bit”

r/AutoTuga ·3 upvotes ·2026-08-20

“Desgaste anormal Continental EcoContact 6 Q — BMW X3 BMW X3 (~72.000 km, cerca de 1 ano e pouco). Já trocou os 4 pneus uma vez e vai agora para o segundo jogo. O primeiro conjunto começou a escamar / sair aos bocados (principalmente à frente). A marca assumiu e colocou pneus iguais (Continental EcoContact 6 Q). Agora, ao fim de cerca de 20.000 km, está a acontecer exatamente o mesmo à frente. Para piorar, após notar perda de pressão lenta atrás, fomos verificar e os dois pneus traseiros estão completamente comidos por dentro. Mais alguém com problemas crónicos de desgaste prematuro com este modelo de pneu ou comportamento semelhante no X3? Read more”

r/BMW ·2 upvotes ·2025-05-18

“Used Continental EcoContact 6 I have recently bought a G31 from 2022 which came with winter tires. Therefor I have bought summer tires which are used and were advertised as 5,5mm profile depth on each tire. I have measured each tire and am wondering which tire should be installed on which side and if front or rear would be better. Unfortunately there is no mark to show on which position they were on the previous owners car. Starting from outside moving inside I have measured the following millimetres: Tire 1: 5.51, 5.69, 5.85, 5.36 Tire 2: 5.40, 5.58, 5.71, 5.33 Tire 3: 5.59, 5.69, 5.79, 5.39 Tire 4: 5.38, 5.55, 5.73, 5.34 Seeing the numbers I would go with tire 2 and 4 on one axis und 1 and 3 on the other. Would that be a good idea and where should each pair go, front or rear? Is this even important at this low difference? I am happy for any advise. Thanks. Read more”

Top themes
#poor wet grip#energy efficiency#premature wear#tread chunking#factory OE fitment#replacement alternatives

Based on 29 community posts

Tire B

Firestone RoadHawk

Mixed

Community discussions reflect mixed perspectives on the Firestone Roadhawk, noting reasonable reviews alongside concerns regarding tread wear. While some test results place it competitively among budget-friendly summer options, owners also discuss practical issues such as unusual noises, generational replacement difficulties, and overall value.

Top themes
#tread wear concerns#budget tire test results#replacement availability issues#generation differences#driving noise symptoms

Based on 5 community posts

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Continental EcoContact 6 B · Firestone RoadHawk
CategorySummerSummer
Vehicle typePassenger Car / CrossoverPassenger Car / Crossover
Sizes available104115
Rim diameters13″ – 22″15″ – 21″
Tread depth7/32″—
UTQG320 A A—
SidewallBlackwall—
Max pressure51 psi—

Which one should you actually buy?

Continental EcoContact 6

Firestone RoadHawk

Too close to call: Continental EcoContact 6 and Firestone RoadHawk are within 2 points overall. Continental EcoContact 6 is stronger on noise, treadwear and handling. Firestone RoadHawk is stronger on wet and dry.

Pick tire A You want a quieter cabin

Continental EcoContact 6 scores 81 vs 46 on noise.

Pick tire B Your priority is wet-weather safety

Firestone RoadHawk scores 68 vs 53 on wet.

Pick tire A You want the longest tread life

Continental EcoContact 6 scores 63 vs 54 on treadwear.

Pick tire A You enjoy sharp, responsive handling

Continental EcoContact 6 scores 50 vs 43 on handling.

Tire A · Continental EcoContact 6
Tire B · Firestone RoadHawk

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

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.

Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score.

61

Narrow edge

EcoContact 6

Amazon