tirewheelguide

Yokohama C Drive looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.

Head-to-head Updated

Falken ZE914 vs Yokohama C Drive — 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 99 + 45 owner reviews. How we score

ZE914 leads, 73–71 Narrow edge

Check price on Amazon · ZE914 or C Drive on Amazon
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.

Falken ZE914
Tire AFalken

ZE914

Summer

Tests – · none yet Owners 74 · 99 reviews

Yokohama C Drive
Tire BYokohama

C Drive

Summer

Tests – · none yet Owners 72 · 45 reviews

Category by category

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

  1. 74

    Dry

    ZE914 +3
    71
    Why this score
    SourceZE914C Drive
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 72 (est.)≈ 70 (est.)
    Reviews found online7773

    ZE914: 60% × 71.5 (est.) + 40% × 77.2 = 74

    C Drive: 60% × 70 (est.) + 40% × 73.3 = 71

    No road tests of dry for ZE914. 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 C Drive. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).

  2. 74

    Wet

    Level
    74
    Why this score
    SourceZE914C Drive
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 73 (est.)≈ 73 (est.)
    Reviews found online7675

    ZE914: 60% × 73 (est.) + 40% × 75.5 = 74

    C Drive: 60% × 72.8 (est.) + 40% × 75.2 = 74

    No road tests of wet for ZE914. 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 C Drive. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).

  3. 71

    Comfort

    C Drive +1
    72
    Why this score
    SourceZE914C Drive
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 70 (est.)≈ 70 (est.)
    Reviews found online7274

    ZE914: 60% × 69.7 (est.) + 40% × 72.4 = 71

    C Drive: 60% × 70 (est.) + 40% × 74.3 = 72

    No road tests of comfort for ZE914 or C Drive. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.

  4. 68

    Treadwear

    ZE914 +2
    66
    Why this score
    SourceZE914C Drive
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 67 (est.)≈ 66 (est.)
    Reviews found online7067

    ZE914: 60% × 67.1 (est.) + 40% × 70.3 = 68

    C Drive: 60% × 65.9 (est.) + 40% × 66.5 = 66

    No road tests of treadwear for ZE914. 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 C Drive. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).

  5. 75

    Handling (owners)

    ZE914 +3
    72
    Why this score
    SourceZE914C Drive
    Reviews found online7572
Scores at a glance
CategoryFalken ZE914Yokohama C Drive
Relative Score 73 71
Dry 74 71
Wet 74 74
Comfort 71 72
Treadwear 68 66
Handling (owners) 75 72

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.

Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Recomputed
Headline score

ZE914

C Drive

Pros, cons & observations

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

Tire A ZE914

Pros

  • Exceptional value for money compared to premium competitors
  • Strong, predictable grip in both dry and wet conditions
  • Progressive handling characteristics that provide driver confidence

Cons

  • Reports of increased road noise, particularly as the tread wears down
  • Inconsistent tread life, with some users experiencing premature wear
  • Occasional reports of poor wet-weather traction on specific high-torque or lightweight sports vehicles
All owner themes in the ZE914 review

Tire B C Drive

Pros

  • Excellent wet weather traction and hydroplaning resistance
  • High levels of ride comfort and low road noise
  • Predictable, progressive handling characteristics

Cons

  • Inconsistent tread life reports ranging from premature wear to high mileage
  • Some users report increased noise and stiffness as the tire ages
  • Mixed feedback on dry grip performance under aggressive driving conditions
All owner themes in the C Drive review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Falken ZE914 B · Yokohama C Drive
CategorySummerSummer
Vehicle typePassenger Car / CrossoverPassenger Car / Crossover

Which one should you actually buy?

Falken ZE914

Yokohama C Drive

Narrow edge: Falken ZE914 — better dry. Where the Yokohama C Drive is ahead, it is by less than 3 points.

Pick tire A You want the most grip on dry roads

Falken ZE914 scores 74 vs 71 on dry.

Tire A · Falken ZE914
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · Yokohama C Drive
Check price on Amazon

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

ZE914 or C Drive?

Which is better in the wet, ZE914 or C Drive?

Neither, by our numbers: 74 vs 74 on the wet score, within 3 points.

Which grips better on dry roads, ZE914 or C Drive?

Falken ZE914, 74 vs 71 on our dry score.

Which is more comfortable, ZE914 or C Drive?

Neither, by our numbers: 71 vs 72 on the comfort score, within 3 points.

Which lasts longer, ZE914 or C Drive?

Neither, by our numbers: 68 vs 66 on the treadwear score, within 3 points.

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