Tests – · none yet Owners 53 · 76 reviews
Head-to-head
Updated
Goodyear Eagle RS-A vs BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S — 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 + 1 road tests and 76 + 1 owner reviews. How we score
g-Force COMP-2 A/S is ahead, 70–58
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.
Tests – · 1 test Owners 68 · 1 review
Best test result: #2 of 19 in 2022 Consumer Reports Ultra High Performance All-Season Tires (tested tread life (miles))
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
60
Dry
g-Force COMP-2 A/S +1070Why this score
Source Eagle RS-A g-Force COMP-2 A/S Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 63 (est.) ≈ 69 (est.) Reviews found online 56 71 Eagle RS-A: 60% × 63.1 (est.) + 40% × 56.2 = 60
g-Force COMP-2 A/S: 60% × 69.4 (est.) + 40% × 71.3 = 70
No road tests of dry for Eagle RS-A. 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 g-Force COMP-2 A/S. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.42).
-
58
Wet
g-Force COMP-2 A/S +1371Why this score
Source Eagle RS-A g-Force COMP-2 A/S Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 61 (est.) ≈ 71 (est.) Reviews found online 54 71 Eagle RS-A: 60% × 61.2 (est.) + 40% × 53.5 = 58
g-Force COMP-2 A/S: 60% × 71.1 (est.) + 40% × 71.4 = 71
No road tests of wet for Eagle RS-A. 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 g-Force COMP-2 A/S. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
-
53
Snow
No comparison–Why this score
Source Eagle RS-A g-Force COMP-2 A/S Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 60 (est.) – Reviews found online 42 – Eagle RS-A: 60% × 60 (est.) + 40% × 42.1 = 53
No road tests of snow for Eagle RS-A. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.37).
-
57
Comfort
g-Force COMP-2 A/S +1168Why this score
Source Eagle RS-A g-Force COMP-2 A/S Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 66 (est.) ≈ 69 (est.) Reviews found online 51 67 Eagle RS-A: 40% × 65.8 (est.) + 60% × 50.6 = 57
g-Force COMP-2 A/S: 40% × 68.8 (est.) + 60% × 67.2 = 68
No road tests of comfort for Eagle RS-A or g-Force COMP-2 A/S. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
65
Noise
No comparison–Why this score
Source Eagle RS-A g-Force COMP-2 A/S Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 67 (est.) – Reviews found online 64 – Eagle RS-A: 60% × 66.6 (est.) + 40% × 63.6 = 65
No road tests of noise for Eagle RS-A. The test half is the tested tires’ average (67): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
60
Treadwear
g-Force COMP-2 A/S +1070Why this score
Source Eagle RS-A g-Force COMP-2 A/S Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests ≈ 63 (est.) 77 Reviews found online 56 59 Eagle RS-A: 60% × 62.6 (est.) + 40% × 56.2 = 60
g-Force COMP-2 A/S: 60% × 77.1 + 40% × 59.4 = 70
No road tests of treadwear for Eagle RS-A. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.35).
-
50
Handling (owners)
g-Force COMP-2 A/S +1969Why this score
Source Eagle RS-A g-Force COMP-2 A/S Reviews found online 50 69
Scores at a glance
| Category | Goodyear Eagle RS-A | BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 58 | 70 |
| Dry | 60 | 70 |
| Wet | 58 | 71 |
| Snow | 53 | – |
| Comfort | 57 | 68 |
| Noise | 65 | – |
| Treadwear | 60 | 70 |
| Handling (owners) | 50 | 69 |
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
Recomputed
Headline score
58
/ 100
Eagle RS-A
70
/ 100
g-Force COMP-2 A/S
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 Eagle RS-A
Pros
- Excellent price-to-performance ratio
- Strong dry road handling and cornering grip
- Reliable tread life for many users, often reaching 60,000 miles
Cons
- Inconsistent traction in heavy rain or standing water
- Poor performance in deep snow and ice conditions
- Increased road noise reported after significant mileage
Tire B g-Force COMP-2 A/S
Not enough owner reviews yet to extract themes.
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Goodyear Eagle RS-A | B · BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S |
|---|---|---|
| Category | All Season | Ultra High Performance All Season tire |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | 14 | — |
| Rim diameters | 15″ – 20″ | — |
| Tread depth | 10 - 12/32″ | 9 - 10/32″ |
| UTQG | 260 - 340 A A | 400 AA A |
| Treadwear warranty | — | 45,000 mi |
| Sidewall | Black Side Wall - Vertical Serrated Band | Black Side Wall |
| Max pressure | 44 - 51 psi | 50 - 51 psi |
Which one should you actually buy?
58
/ 100
Goodyear Eagle RS-A
70
/ 100
BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S
Winner: BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S — better handling, wet and comfort. It leads or ties in every category we score. BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S rests on little evidence so far (1 test, 1 review), so read this result as provisional.
Pick tire B
You enjoy sharp, responsive handling
BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S scores 69 vs 50 on handling.
Pick tire B
Your priority is wet-weather safety
BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S scores 71 vs 58 on wet.
Pick tire B
You want the most comfortable ride
BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S scores 68 vs 57 on comfort.
Pick tire B
You want the most grip on dry roads
BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S scores 70 vs 60 on dry.
Tire A · Goodyear Eagle RS-A
Tire B · BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Eagle RS-A or g-Force COMP-2 A/S?
Which is better in the wet, Eagle RS-A or g-Force COMP-2 A/S?
BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S, 71 vs 58 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Eagle RS-A or g-Force COMP-2 A/S?
BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S, 70 vs 60 on our dry score.
Which is more comfortable, Eagle RS-A or g-Force COMP-2 A/S?
BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S, 68 vs 57 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, Eagle RS-A or g-Force COMP-2 A/S?
BFGoodrich g-Force COMP-2 A/S, 70 vs 60 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