tirewheelguide

Firestone Multihawk looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.

Head-to-head Updated

Firestone Multihawk vs Laufenn S Fit EQ+ — 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 + 11 road tests and 16 + 11 owner reviews. How we score

S Fit EQ+ leads, 74–70 Narrow edge

Check price on Amazon · S Fit EQ+ or Multihawk 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.

Firestone Multihawk
Tire AFirestone

Multihawk

Summer

± 8Provisional

Tests – · none yet Owners 70 · 16 reviews

Laufenn S Fit EQ+
Tire BLaufenn

S Fit EQ+

Summer

± 6

Tests 66 · 11 tests Owners 80 · 11 reviews

Best test result: #1 of 10 in 2026 Auto Zeitung 18 Inch Summer Tyre Test (noise)

Category by category

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

  1. 70

    Dry

    S Fit EQ+ +12
    82
    Why this score
    SourceMultihawkS Fit EQ+
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 10 tests≈ 69 (est.)80
    Reviews found online7185

    Multihawk: 60% × 69.3 (est.) + 40% × 71.2 = 70

    S Fit EQ+: 60% × 79.8 + 40% × 84.8 = 82

    No road tests of dry for Multihawk. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).

  2. 71

    Wet

    S Fit EQ+ +4
    75
    Why this score
    SourceMultihawkS Fit EQ+
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 11 tests≈ 71 (est.)73
    Reviews found online7178

    Multihawk: 60% × 70.9 (est.) + 40% × 71.1 = 71

    S Fit EQ+: 60% × 73.5 + 40% × 78.3 = 75

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

  3. 65

    Comfort

    S Fit EQ+ +8
    73
    Why this score
    SourceMultihawkS Fit EQ+
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 2 tests≈ 67 (est.)66
    Reviews found online6377

    Multihawk: 40% × 67.4 (est.) + 60% × 62.6 = 65

    S Fit EQ+: 40% × 66.3 + 60% × 77.3 = 73

    No road tests of comfort for Multihawk. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).

  4. –

    Noise

    No comparison
    73
    Why this score
    SourceMultihawkS Fit EQ+
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 5 tests–77
    Reviews found online–≈ 66 (est.)

    S Fit EQ+: 60% × 77 + 40% × 66.4 (est.) = 73

    No owner ratings of noise for S Fit EQ+. The owner half is the owners’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests, so the tests say nothing about how owners would rate it.

  5. 68

    Treadwear

    Multihawk +12
    56
    Why this score
    SourceMultihawkS Fit EQ+
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 5 tests≈ 67 (est.)43
    Reviews found online6976

    Multihawk: 60% × 67.3 (est.) + 40% × 68.8 = 68

    S Fit EQ+: 60% × 43.2 + 40% × 76.2 = 56

    No road tests of treadwear for Multihawk. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).

  6. 70

    Handling (owners)

    S Fit EQ+ +13
    83
    Why this score
    SourceMultihawkS Fit EQ+
    Reviews found online7083
  7. –

    Efficiency

    No comparison
    73
    Why this score
    SourceMultihawkS Fit EQ+
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 6 tests–73
Scores at a glance
CategoryFirestone MultihawkLaufenn S Fit EQ+
Relative Score 70 74
Dry 70 82
Wet 71 75
Comfort 65 73
Noise – 73
Treadwear 68 56
Handling (owners) 70 83
Efficiency – 73

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
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
Not 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

Multihawk

± 6

S Fit EQ+

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

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.

DisciplineCategoryMultihawkS Fit EQ+ΔHead-to-head
Also published by the testers (not in the score)
Overall Ranking Overall #7/16 2014 ADAC 175/65 R14 Summer Tyre Test #9/10 2026 Auto Zeitung 18 Inch Summer Tyre Test – Different tests

Pros, cons & observations

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

Tire A Multihawk

Pros

  • Excellent price-to-performance ratio
  • Strong dry-weather grip and handling
  • Quiet and comfortable ride quality for daily commuting

Cons

  • Inconsistent wet-weather traction
  • Reports of premature tread wear or structural issues
  • Twitchy handling on uneven or poor road surfaces
All owner themes in the Multihawk review

Tire B S Fit EQ+

Pros

  • Good to excellent dry grip, traction and handling, with several reviewers noting stable, confident behavior
  • Wet grip described as decent to excellent, with plenty of grip in both conditions
  • Excellent value; frequently compared favorably with Continental, Goodyear, Michelin and Hankook tires at a much lower price

Cons

  • Road noise noted as louder than expected by some reviewers, with one reporting a marked increase after 2,500 km
  • Ride can feel stiff or harder than needed, and one reviewer found the tires became hard and uncomfortable below 10°C
  • Longevity is uncertain; reviewers estimate roughly 18,000-20,000 miles from one set, and others are unsure how long they will last
All owner themes in the S Fit EQ+ review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Firestone Multihawk B · Laufenn S Fit EQ+
CategorySummerSummer
Vehicle typePassenger Car / CrossoverPassenger Car / Crossover
Sizes available—74
Rim diameters—15″ – 20″
UTQG200 - 500 AA - B A - B360 A A

Which one should you actually buy?

Firestone Multihawk

Laufenn S Fit EQ+

Narrow edge: Laufenn S Fit EQ+ — better handling, dry and comfort. Pick the Firestone Multihawk if treadwear matters most to you. Firestone Multihawk rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 16 reviews), so read this result as provisional.

Pick tire B You enjoy sharp, responsive handling

Laufenn S Fit EQ+ scores 83 vs 70 on handling.

Pick tire A You want the longest tread life

Firestone Multihawk scores 68 vs 56 on treadwear.

Pick tire B You want the most grip on dry roads

Laufenn S Fit EQ+ scores 82 vs 70 on dry.

Pick tire B You want the most comfortable ride

Laufenn S Fit EQ+ scores 73 vs 65 on comfort.

Tire A · Firestone Multihawk
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · Laufenn S Fit EQ+
Check price on Amazon

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

Multihawk or S Fit EQ+?

Which is better in the wet, Multihawk or S Fit EQ+?

Laufenn S Fit EQ+, 75 vs 71 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, Multihawk or S Fit EQ+?

Laufenn S Fit EQ+, 82 vs 70 on our dry score.

Which is more comfortable, Multihawk or S Fit EQ+?

Laufenn S Fit EQ+, 73 vs 65 on our comfort score.

Which lasts longer, Multihawk or S Fit EQ+?

Firestone Multihawk, 68 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