Falken Azenis FK520 vs Nokian Powerproof 2
The trade-off is that both tyres have a distinct “split personality” depending on conditions and test format. The FK520 can look very convincing on dry handling and aquaplaning thresholds, yet gets marked down for imprecise steering/turn-in and-most importantly-wet handling confidence. The Powerproof 2 brings stronger dry braking and generally tidier dynamics, but has a notable weakness in straight-line aquaplaning in at least one test, which is a real-world risk factor on deeply waterlogged motorways.
Test Results
Independent comparison tyre tests are the best source of data to get tyre information from, and the good news is there have been three tests which compare both tyres directly!
| Tyre | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Falken Azenis FK520 | one | |
| Nokian Powerproof 2 | two |
While it might look like the Nokian Powerproof 2 is better than the Falken Azenis FK520 purely based on the higher number of test wins, tyres are very complicated objects which means where one tyre is better than the other can be more important in real world use.
Let's look at how the two tyres compare across multiple tyre test categories.
Key Strengths
- Stronger wet braking in shared tests (e.g., 27.8 m vs 28.1 m; 43.4 m vs 44.0 m)
- Better aquaplaning resistance in shared Autobild data (91.6 vs 89.7 km/h straight; better curved-aqua metric) and best-in-test curved aquaplaning threshold in ACE (71.5 km/h)
- Better projected wear and abrasion results in Autobild (52,080 vs 50,080 km; 1305 g vs 1386 g)
- Clear value advantage in Autobild cost-per-distance (12.86 vs 15.18 price/1000)
- Consistently shorter dry braking distances in shared measurements (34.4 m vs 35.3 m, ~2.6% advantage)
- Higher dry handling pace in Autobild (100.1 vs 98.5 km/h) and stronger subjective dry handling score there
- Generally stronger wet handling balance in the shared results (wins wet handling and wet circle in Autobild; 17/20 wet handling in ACE)
- Better rolling resistance/economy trend (7.48 vs 7.71 kg/t in Autobild; joint 2nd economy score in ACE)
Dry Braking
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Nokian Powerproof 2 was better during two dry braking tests. On average the Nokian Powerproof 2 stopped the vehicle in 2.55% less distance than the Falken Azenis FK520.
Best In Dry Braking: Nokian Powerproof 2
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Nokian Powerproof 2 was better during one dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Nokian Powerproof 2 was 1.6% faster around a lap than the Falken Azenis FK520.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Nokian Powerproof 2
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Dry Handling
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Nokian Powerproof 2 was better during one subj. dry handling tests. On average the Nokian Powerproof 2 scored 33.75% more points than the Falken Azenis FK520.
Best In Subj. Dry Handling: Nokian Powerproof 2
See how the Subj. Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Falken Azenis FK520 was better during two wet braking tests. On average the Falken Azenis FK520 stopped the vehicle in 1.25% less distance than the Nokian Powerproof 2.
Best In Wet Braking: Falken Azenis FK520
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Nokian Powerproof 2 was better during one wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Nokian Powerproof 2 was 0.49% faster around a wet lap than the Falken Azenis FK520.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Nokian Powerproof 2
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Wet Handling
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Falken Azenis FK520 and Nokian Powerproof 2 performed equally well in subj. wet handling tests.
Best In Subj. Wet Handling: Both tyres performed equally well
See how the Subj. Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Nokian Powerproof 2 was better during one wet circle tests. On average the Nokian Powerproof 2 was 0.67% faster around a wet circle than the Falken Azenis FK520.
Best In Wet Circle: Nokian Powerproof 2
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Falken Azenis FK520 was better during one straight aqua tests. On average the Falken Azenis FK520 floated at a 2.07% higher speed than the Nokian Powerproof 2.
Best In Straight Aqua: Falken Azenis FK520
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Falken Azenis FK520 was better during one curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Falken Azenis FK520 slipped out at a 6.06% higher speed than the Nokian Powerproof 2.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Falken Azenis FK520
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Subj. Comfort
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Falken Azenis FK520 and Nokian Powerproof 2 performed equally well in subj. comfort tests.
Best In Subj. Comfort: Both tyres performed equally well
See how the Subj. Comfort winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Nokian Powerproof 2 was better during one noise tests. On average the Nokian Powerproof 2 measured 0.42% quieter than the Falken Azenis FK520.
Best In Noise: Nokian Powerproof 2
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Falken Azenis FK520 was better during one wear tests. On average the Falken Azenis FK520 is predicted to cover 3.84% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the Nokian Powerproof 2.
Best In Wear: Falken Azenis FK520
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Value
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Falken Azenis FK520 was better during one value tests. On average the Falken Azenis FK520 proved to have a 15.28% better value based on price/1000km than the Nokian Powerproof 2.
Best In Value: Falken Azenis FK520
See how the Value winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Nokian Powerproof 2 was better during one rolling resistance tests. On average the Nokian Powerproof 2 had a 2.98% lower rolling resistance than the Falken Azenis FK520.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Nokian Powerproof 2
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Abrasion
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Falken Azenis FK520 was better during one abrasion tests. On average the Falken Azenis FK520 lost 5.84% less particle wear matter than the Nokian Powerproof 2.
Best In Abrasion: Falken Azenis FK520
See how the Abrasion winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Tyre Reviews also collects real world driver reviews for the Falken Azenis FK520 and Nokian Powerproof 2.
In total the Falken Azenis FK520 has been reviewed 39 times and drivers have given the tyre 84% overall.
The Nokian Powerproof 2 has been reviewed 1 times and drivers have given the tyre 95% overall.
This means in real world driving, people prefer the Nokian Powerproof 2.
I was already quite satisfied with the Powerproof SUV. In between, I briefly used the Wetproof 1: the grip was also very good, but in direct comparison, it had significantly less direct steering.
Conclusion
In wet conditions, the story splits. Falken repeatedly stops shorter in wet braking (27.8 m vs 28.1 m in the 52-tyre braking test; 43.4 m vs 44.0 m in Autobild), and it clearly leads in aquaplaning resistance in Autobild (91.6 vs 89.7 km/h straight aquaplaning; higher curved aquaplaning metric too). ACE reinforces that strength: Falken posted the best curved-aquaplaning threshold (71.5 km/h). However, multiple sources flag a meaningful handling-confidence penalty for Falken in the wet (ACE wet handling only 12/20 with under/oversteer comments; Autobild also notes vague/imprecise turn-in), whereas Nokian is generally better on wet handling/circle despite its straight-aqua vulnerability in ACE (earliest loss of contact at 80.1 km/h).
If you want the safest “all-rounder feel” and prioritize dry braking/handling precision, the Powerproof 2 is the cleaner pick overall (it finished ahead in 2 of 3 shared tests: 11th vs 13th in Autobild; 10th vs 14th in the braking shootout). If your driving includes frequent standing water, heavy rain motorways, and you care about cost-per-km, the FK520 makes a strong case: it combines slightly better wet braking, better aquaplaning margins in the shared Autobild metrics, longer projected wear (52,080 vs 50,080 km), and materially better value (12.86 vs 15.18 price/1000 in Autobild). The practical takeaway: Nokian is the more “sorted” sporty summer tyre day-to-day, but Falken can be the smarter, more hydroplaning-resistant value buy-provided you can live with its wet-handling subjectivity.
Key Differences
- Dry braking is a repeatable Nokian advantage (34.4 m vs 35.3 m in the shared 245/45 R19 braking measurements), which can be meaningful in emergency stops.
- Wet braking consistently favors Falken by a small but repeatable margin (e.g., 27.8 m vs 28.1 m; 43.4 m vs 44.0 m).
- Aquaplaning picture is mixed: Falken leads in Autobild straight/curved aquaplaning and is best in ACE for curved aquaplaning, while Nokian is specifically weakest in ACE straight-line aquaplaning (80.1 km/h).
- Wet handling confidence diverges: Falken is criticized for insecurity/under- and oversteer in ACE wet handling (12/20), whereas Nokian is comparatively strong in wet handling there (17/20) and edges wet handling/circle in Autobild.
- Ride/noise and efficiency are close, but Nokian has small advantages in rolling resistance and noise in Autobild (7.48 vs 7.71 kg/t; 71.7 vs 72 dB).
- Ownership/value tilt to Falken: longer wear projection and notably better value metric in Autobild (12.86 vs 15.18 price/1000), making it the more cost-effective option if performance needs are met.
Overall Winner: Nokian Powerproof 2
Based on the tyre test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Nokian Powerproof 2 has demonstrated better overall performance in this comparison. However, as you can see from the spider diagram above, each tyre has its own strengths which should be considered in your final tyre buying choice.Similar Comparisons
Looking for more tyre comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tyres:
Nokian Powerproof 2 Top Comparisons
No other comparisons available for this tyre.
Footnote
This page has been developed using tyre industry testing best practices. This means we are only comparing tests which have had both tyres in the same test.
Why is this important? Tyre testing is heavily affected by things like surface grip levels and surface temperature, which means you can only compare values from the same day. During a tyre test external condition changes are calculated into the overall results, but it is not possible to calculate this between tyre tests performed on different days or at different locations.
As a result you will see other tests on Tyre Reviews which feature both the %s and %s, but as they weren't conducted on the same day, the results are not comparable.
Lots of other websites do this sort of tyre comparison, Tyre Reviews doesn't.
Discussion
- No comments yet — be the first.