tirewheelguide
Head-to-head Updated

Firestone Destination M/T2 vs Falken Azenis PT722 — 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 0 + 0 road tests and 39 + 10 owner reviews. How we score

Too close to call: Destination M/T2 67, Azenis PT722 66.

Check price on Amazon · Destination M/T2 Check price on Amazon · Azenis PT722
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 Azenis PT722
Tire BFalken

Azenis PT722

All Season

± 8Provisional

Tests – · none yet Owners 67 · 10 reviews

Category by category

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

  1. 68

    Dry

    Destination M/T2 +2
    66
    Why this score
    SourceDestination M/T2Azenis PT722
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 68 (est.)≈ 67 (est.)
    Reviews found online6865

    Destination M/T2: 60% × 67.9 (est.) + 40% × 67.7 = 68

    Azenis PT722: 60% × 67 (est.) + 40% × 65.4 = 66

    No road tests of dry for Destination M/T2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.42).

    No road tests of dry for Azenis PT722. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.42).

  2. 72

    Wet

    Destination M/T2 +8
    64
    Why this score
    SourceDestination M/T2Azenis PT722
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 71 (est.)≈ 66 (est.)
    Reviews found online7262

    Destination M/T2: 60% × 71.4 (est.) + 40% × 71.9 = 72

    Azenis PT722: 60% × 66 (est.) + 40% × 62.1 = 64

    No road tests of wet for Destination M/T2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).

    No road tests of wet for Azenis PT722. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).

  3. 71

    Snow

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceDestination M/T2Azenis PT722
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 71 (est.)–
    Reviews found online72–

    Destination M/T2: 60% × 71.1 (est.) + 40% × 71.5 = 71

    No road tests of snow for Destination M/T2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.37).

  4. 63

    Comfort

    Azenis PT722 +3
    66
    Why this score
    SourceDestination M/T2Azenis PT722
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 67 (est.)≈ 68 (est.)
    Reviews found online6065

    Destination M/T2: 40% × 67.4 (est.) + 60% × 59.7 = 63

    Azenis PT722: 40% × 68.4 (est.) + 60% × 65.2 = 66

    No road tests of comfort for Destination M/T2 or Azenis PT722. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.

  5. 59

    Noise

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceDestination M/T2Azenis PT722
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 67 (est.)–
    Reviews found online48–

    Destination M/T2: 60% × 66.6 (est.) + 40% × 48 = 59

    No road tests of noise for Destination M/T2. The test half is the tested tires’ average (67): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.

  6. 56

    Treadwear

    Azenis PT722 +14
    70
    Why this score
    SourceDestination M/T2Azenis PT722
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 61 (est.)≈ 68 (est.)
    Reviews found online5073

    Destination M/T2: 60% × 60.5 (est.) + 40% × 50.1 = 56

    Azenis PT722: 60% × 68.5 (est.) + 40% × 72.9 = 70

    No road tests of treadwear for Destination M/T2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.35).

    No road tests of treadwear for Azenis PT722. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.35).

  7. –

    Handling (owners)

    No comparison
    68
    Why this score
    SourceDestination M/T2Azenis PT722
    Reviews found online–68
Scores at a glance
CategoryFirestone Destination M/T2Falken Azenis PT722
Relative Score 67 66
Dry 68 66
Wet 72 64
Snow 71 –
Comfort 63 66
Noise 59 –
Treadwear 56 70
Handling (owners) – 68

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
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

Recomputed
Headline score
± 8

Destination M/T2

± 8

Azenis PT722

Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.

Pros, cons & observations

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

Tire A Destination M/T2

Pros

  • Unexpectedly low road noise for a mud-terrain tire
  • Exceptional off-road traction in mud, sand, and deep snow
  • Good highway manners and stable handling

Cons

  • Can develop cupping and increased noise if maintenance/rotations are neglected
  • Slight initial slip on road paint during the first few thousand miles
  • Mixed reports on longevity when heavily utilized for towing or rough gravel service
All owner themes in the Destination M/T2 review

Tire B Azenis PT722

Pros

  • Exceptional tread life and durability
  • Low noise levels and high ride comfort
  • Excellent value for the price point

Cons

  • Unpredictable or poor traction in wet conditions
  • Lack of progressive grip when reaching traction limits
  • Inconsistent performance across different vehicle platforms
All owner themes in the Azenis PT722 review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Firestone Destination M/T2 B · Falken Azenis PT722
CategoryMud-Terrain tireAll Season
Vehicle typeSUV and 4x4Passenger Car / Crossover
Sizes available18—
Rim diameters15″ – 20″—
Tread depth19/32″—
SidewallOutlined White Lettering—
Max pressure50 psi—

Which one should you actually buy?

Firestone Destination M/T2

Falken Azenis PT722

Too close to call: Firestone Destination M/T2 and Falken Azenis PT722 are within 2 points overall. Firestone Destination M/T2 is stronger on wet. Falken Azenis PT722 is stronger on treadwear and comfort. Falken Azenis PT722 rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 10 reviews), so read this result as provisional.

Pick tire B You want the longest tread life

Falken Azenis PT722 scores 70 vs 56 on treadwear.

Pick tire A Your priority is wet-weather safety

Firestone Destination M/T2 scores 72 vs 64 on wet.

Pick tire B You want the most comfortable ride

Falken Azenis PT722 scores 66 vs 63 on comfort.

Tire A · Firestone Destination M/T2
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · Falken Azenis PT722
Check price on Amazon

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

Destination M/T2 or Azenis PT722?

Which is better in the wet, Destination M/T2 or Azenis PT722?

Firestone Destination M/T2, 72 vs 64 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, Destination M/T2 or Azenis PT722?

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

Which is more comfortable, Destination M/T2 or Azenis PT722?

Falken Azenis PT722, 66 vs 63 on our comfort score.

Which lasts longer, Destination M/T2 or Azenis PT722?

Falken Azenis PT722, 70 vs 56 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