tirewheelguide

Toyo NanoEnergy R38 looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.

Head-to-head Updated

Firestone RoadHawk vs Toyo NanoEnergy R38 — Compared

Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews. Based on 17 + 0 road tests and 644 + 8 owner reviews. How we score

NanoEnergy R38 is ahead, 70–63

Check price on Amazon · NanoEnergy R38 or RoadHawk 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 RoadHawk
Tire AFirestone

RoadHawk

Summer

Tests 70 · 17 tests Owners 48 · 644 reviews

Best test result: #1 of 15 in 2019 Summer and All Season Tyre Test (wet handling)

“sind diese Sommerreifen noch okay? Im August 2023 gekauft und circa 25 tausend km gefahren. Firestone Roadhawk, DOT 4922. Habe an meinem Opel Meriva beim Anfahren nach links, zB beim Ausparken oder beim Anfahren in einer engen Linkskurve von vorne rechts ein mehrmaliges Poltern gehört. Habe ein bisschen gegoogelt und von ausgeschlagenem Querlenker gelesen. Im Oktober 2022 hat das Auto einen neuen Vorderachsträger und neue Querlenker bekommen. Nun habe ich Winterräder montiert und das Poltern beim Anfahren nach links ist weg. Was kann das sein? Read more”

Toyo NanoEnergy R38
Tire BToyo

NanoEnergy R38

Summer

Provisional

Tests – · none yet Owners 70 · 8 reviews

Category by category

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

  1. 70

    Dry

    NanoEnergy R38 +1
    71
    Why this score
    SourceRoadHawkNanoEnergy R38
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 16 / – tests82≈ 70 (est.)
    Reviews found online5272

    RoadHawk: 60% × 81.7 + 40% × 52.2 = 70

    NanoEnergy R38: 60% × 69.5 (est.) + 40% × 72.2 = 71

    No road tests of dry for NanoEnergy R38. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).

  2. 68

    Wet

    NanoEnergy R38 +4
    72
    Why this score
    SourceRoadHawkNanoEnergy R38
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 17 / – tests76≈ 72 (est.)
    Reviews found online5673

    RoadHawk: 60% × 76.1 + 40% × 55.5 = 68

    NanoEnergy R38: 60% × 71.7 (est.) + 40% × 73.2 = 72

    No road tests of wet for NanoEnergy R38. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).

  3. 59

    Comfort

    NanoEnergy R38 +10
    69
    Why this score
    SourceRoadHawkNanoEnergy R38
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 2 / – tests67≈ 69 (est.)
    Reviews found online4669

    RoadHawk: 60% × 67 + 40% × 46.4 = 59

    NanoEnergy R38: 60% × 69.1 (est.) + 40% × 69.1 = 69

    No road tests of comfort for NanoEnergy R38. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.

  4. 45

    Noise

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceRoadHawkNanoEnergy R38
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 8 / – tests30–
    Reviews found online≈ 67 (est.)–

    RoadHawk: 60% × 30.5 + 40% × 67.3 (est.) = 45

    No owner ratings of noise for RoadHawk. The owner half is the owners’ average (67): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests, so the tests say nothing about how owners would rate it.

  5. 54

    Treadwear

    NanoEnergy R38 +11
    65
    Why this score
    SourceRoadHawkNanoEnergy R38
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 6 / – tests65≈ 65 (est.)
    Reviews found online3765

    RoadHawk: 60% × 64.7 + 40% × 37.1 = 54

    NanoEnergy R38: 60% × 65.3 (est.) + 40% × 64.6 = 65

    No road tests of treadwear for NanoEnergy R38. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).

  6. 43

    Handling (owners)

    NanoEnergy R38 +28
    71
    Why this score
    SourceRoadHawkNanoEnergy R38
    Reviews found online4371
Scores at a glance
CategoryFirestone RoadHawkToyo NanoEnergy R38
Relative Score 63 70
Dry 70 71
Wet 68 72
Comfort 59 69
Noise 45 –
Treadwear 54 65
Handling (owners) 43 71

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
Recomputed
Headline score

RoadHawk

NanoEnergy R38

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 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

Tire B NanoEnergy R38

Pros

  • Reliable wet and dry grip with predictable handling limits
  • Good value for money compared to premium brand alternatives
  • Solid longevity and mileage, with respectable tread wear reported

Cons

  • Slightly increased road noise reported by some users
  • Limited size or availability challenges noted by consumers wanting replacements
All owner themes in the NanoEnergy R38 review

What real owners are saying

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

Tire A

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.

r/automobil ·2025-11-20

“sind diese Sommerreifen noch okay? Im August 2023 gekauft und circa 25 tausend km gefahren. Firestone Roadhawk, DOT 4922. Habe an meinem Opel Meriva beim Anfahren nach links, zB beim Ausparken oder beim Anfahren in einer engen Linkskurve von vorne rechts ein mehrmaliges Poltern gehört. Habe ein bisschen gegoogelt und von ausgeschlagenem Querlenker gelesen. Im Oktober 2022 hat das Auto einen neuen Vorderachsträger und neue Querlenker bekommen. Nun habe ich Winterräder montiert und das Poltern beim Anfahren nach links ist weg. Was kann das sein? Read more”
bobistheoilguy.com ·2023-09-18

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

Based on 5 community posts

Tire B

Toyo NanoEnergy R38

We haven't collected enough community discussion about this tire yet.

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Firestone RoadHawk B · Toyo NanoEnergy R38
CategorySummerSummer
Vehicle typePassenger Car / CrossoverPassenger Car / Crossover
Sizes available115—
Rim diameters15″ – 21″—

Which one should you actually buy?

Firestone RoadHawk

Toyo NanoEnergy R38

Winner: Toyo NanoEnergy R38 — better handling, treadwear and comfort. It leads or ties in every category we score. Toyo NanoEnergy R38 rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 8 reviews), so read this result as provisional.

Pick tire B You enjoy sharp, responsive handling

Toyo NanoEnergy R38 scores 71 vs 43 on handling.

Pick tire B You want the longest tread life

Toyo NanoEnergy R38 scores 65 vs 54 on treadwear.

Pick tire B You want the most comfortable ride

Toyo NanoEnergy R38 scores 69 vs 59 on comfort.

Pick tire B Your priority is wet-weather safety

Toyo NanoEnergy R38 scores 72 vs 68 on wet.

Tire A · Firestone RoadHawk
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · Toyo NanoEnergy R38
Check price on Amazon

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

RoadHawk or NanoEnergy R38?

Which is better in the wet, RoadHawk or NanoEnergy R38?

Toyo NanoEnergy R38, 72 vs 68 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, RoadHawk or NanoEnergy R38?

Neither, by our numbers: 70 vs 71 on the dry score, within 3 points.

Which is more comfortable, RoadHawk or NanoEnergy R38?

Toyo NanoEnergy R38, 69 vs 59 on our comfort score.

Which lasts longer, RoadHawk or NanoEnergy R38?

Toyo NanoEnergy R38, 65 vs 54 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