14 shops, 56 847 products

Comparison: tyres similar to Kumho Ecsta HS52

Table of contents:

Summary
Wet
Dry
Costs
Mutual tests
Dimensions and prices
Buy %

Looking for a comparison of Kumho Ecsta HS52 to tyres that are made in similar dimensions? Here you can find detailed information based on tests, reviews and manufacturer's data.

#	Kumho Ecsta HS52 /73%	Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun /72%	Kleber Dynaxer HP4 /74%	BFGoodrich Advantage /66%	Firestone Roadhawk /57%	Michelin Primacy 4 /82%	Bridgestone Turanza T005 /91%	Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 /52%	Continental EcoContact 6 /48%

Dimensions	R14 - R18	R14 - R22	R14 - R17	R14 - R20	R15 - R21	R15 - R20	R14 - R22	R15 - R20	R13 - R22
Price	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices
Remove

We have gathered data from various tests to compare the Kumho Ecsta HS52 and the Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun summer touring tyres. Our goal is to deliver a comprehensive overview of two well-known options amongst drivers: the flagship model from Kumho and the popular choice from Falken.

The Kumho Ecsta HS52, which replaced the previous model Kumho Ecsta HS51, has garnered an impressive rating of 78%. According to various tests, it performs exceptionally well in dry braking, dry handling, wet braking and price/value factors. It has also managed to nab third place in the test comparison of 51 tyres conducted by Autobild, by displaying convincing performances on both wet and dry tracks and offering short brake distances on both surfaces. Despite its slightly moderate rolling comfort, the low fuel consumption and environmental efficiency make it a reliable contender.

The Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun, on the other hand, boasts a substantial rating of 75%. When pitted against other tyres by Vibilagare and Autobild, it has managed to secure fourth and fifth places respectively. The tyre is well-regarded for its dry handling, strong performance against aquaplaning, and comfort. Despite slightly restricted mileage and a bit higher rolling resistance, several tests have highlighted its security reserves for aquaplaning and dynamic dry handling as some of its best features.

When compared side by side, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 emerges with an overall edge due to its better test rating and more consistent performance across various parameters. However, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun doesn’t fall far behind, delivering solid performances in specific areas like dry handling and resistance to aquaplaning. Furthermore, the Falken tyre seems to excel considerably when it comes to comfort and aquaplaning performance.

To sum up, both tyres are solid choices for a summer touring tyre, each with their own strengths. While the Kumho Ecsta HS52 excels in terms of balancing both wet and dry performance along with great value for money, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun shines with its dry handling and aquaplaning resistance capabilities. Therefore, the ultimate decision would depend on your individual preference and driving conditions.

Segment

1. Michelin Primacy 4 Premium

2. Bridgestone Turanza T005 Premium

3. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 Premium

4. Continental EcoContact 6 Premium

5. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Upper-middle

6. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun Upper-middle

7. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Upper-middle

8. BFGoodrich Advantage Upper-middle

9. Firestone Roadhawk Upper-middle

Number of sizes available

1. Bridgestone Turanza T005 353

2. Continental EcoContact 6 319

3. Michelin Primacy 4 239

4. Firestone Roadhawk 154

5. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 150

6. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 149

7. BFGoodrich Advantage 146

8. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 120

9. Kumho Ecsta HS52 89

Number of tests

1. Bridgestone Turanza T005 33x

2. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 23x

3. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 22x

4. Firestone Roadhawk 21x

5. Michelin Primacy 4 20x

6. BFGoodrich Advantage 13x

7. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 12x

8. Kumho Ecsta HS52 9x

9. Continental EcoContact 6 5x

Best position in test

1. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 1.

2. Bridgestone Turanza T005 1.

3. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 1.

4. Michelin Primacy 4 1.

5. Firestone Roadhawk 2.

6. Kumho Ecsta HS52 2.

7. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 2.

8. Continental EcoContact 6 7.

9. BFGoodrich Advantage 8.

Worst position in test

1. Michelin Primacy 4 8.

2. Bridgestone Turanza T005 11.

3. Kumho Ecsta HS52 13.

4. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 14.

5. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 15.

6. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 18.

7. Continental EcoContact 6 23.

8. BFGoodrich Advantage 24.

9. Firestone Roadhawk 31.

Average position in tests

1. Michelin Primacy 4 3.5

2. Bridgestone Turanza T005 4.09

3. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 4.91

4. Kumho Ecsta HS52 5.67

5. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 6.57

6. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 11.58

7. Firestone Roadhawk 11.9

8. Continental EcoContact 6 13

9. BFGoodrich Advantage 13.62

Year of the last test

1. BFGoodrich Advantage 2025

2. Bridgestone Turanza T005 2025

3. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 2025

4. Kumho Ecsta HS52 2024

5. Firestone Roadhawk 2023

6. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 2023

7. Continental EcoContact 6 2022

8. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 2022

9. Michelin Primacy 4 2022

Best rating in test

1. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 Exemplary

2. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun Exemplary

3. Firestone Roadhawk Exemplary

4. Bridgestone Turanza T005 Exemplary

5. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Highly recommended

6. Michelin Primacy 4 Highly recommended

7. BFGoodrich Advantage Good

8. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Good

9. Continental EcoContact 6 Satisfactory

Worst rating in test

1. Bridgestone Turanza T005 Good

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Good

3. Michelin Primacy 4 Recommended

4. Continental EcoContact 6 Satisfactory

5. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 Conditionally recommended

6. Firestone Roadhawk Conditionally recommended

7. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Conditionally recommended

8. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun Still recommended

9. BFGoodrich Advantage Sufficient

Wet

(Overall rating)

Bridgestone
Turanza T005

88%

Firestone
Roadhawk

78%

Falken
ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun

76%

Kumho
Ecsta HS52

74%

Michelin
Primacy 4

74%

Hankook
Ventus Prime3 K125

71.1%

Kleber
Dynaxer HP4

68%

BFGoodrich
Advantage

63%

Continental
EcoContact 6

48%

Wet braking

1. Bridgestone Turanza T005 92%

2. Michelin Primacy 4 81%

3. Kumho Ecsta HS52 81%

4. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 80%

5. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 71%

6. Firestone Roadhawk 69%

7. BFGoodrich Advantage 61%

8. Continental EcoContact 6 42%

9. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 0%

Aquaplaning - cross

1. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 83%

2. Firestone Roadhawk 82%

3. Bridgestone Turanza T005 79%

4. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 72%

5. Michelin Primacy 4 69%

6. BFGoodrich Advantage 68%

7. Kumho Ecsta HS52 63%

8. Continental EcoContact 6 51%

9. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 0%

Aquaplaning - longitudal

1. Michelin Primacy 4 86%

2. Firestone Roadhawk 82%

3. Bridgestone Turanza T005 80%

4. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 80%

5. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 77%

6. Kumho Ecsta HS52 72%

7. BFGoodrich Advantage 67%

8. Continental EcoContact 6 57%

9. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 0%

Wet circle cornering

1. Bridgestone Turanza T005 96%

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 82%

3. Firestone Roadhawk 75%

4. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 73%

5. Michelin Primacy 4 71%

6. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 65%

7. BFGoodrich Advantage 61%

8. Continental EcoContact 6 46%

9. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 0%

Wet handling

1. Bridgestone Turanza T005 96%

2. Firestone Roadhawk 84%

3. Kumho Ecsta HS52 72%

4. Michelin Primacy 4 63%

5. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 63%

6. BFGoodrich Advantage 57%

7. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 53%

8. Continental EcoContact 6 46%

9. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 0%

Wet braking according to EU label

1. Bridgestone Turanza T005 A

2. Firestone Roadhawk A

3. Kumho Ecsta HS52 A

4. Michelin Primacy 4 A

5. BFGoodrich Advantage A

6. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 A

7. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun B

8. Continental EcoContact 6 B

9. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 ?

Comfort

(Overall rating)

Continental
EcoContact 6

91%

Kleber
Dynaxer HP4

87%

Michelin
Primacy 4

86%

BFGoodrich
Advantage

84%

Hankook
Ventus Prime3 K125

78.8%

Kumho
Ecsta HS52

73%

Bridgestone
Turanza T005

68%

Falken
ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun

68%

Firestone
Roadhawk

67%

Exterior noise

1. Continental EcoContact 6 95%

2. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 87%

3. Michelin Primacy 4 86%

4. BFGoodrich Advantage 79%

5. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 72%

6. Bridgestone Turanza T005 70%

7. Firestone Roadhawk 65%

8. Kumho Ecsta HS52 65%

9. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 0%

Outside noise accoring to EU label

1. Michelin Primacy 4 68 dB

2. Continental EcoContact 6 ?

3. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 ?

4. Bridgestone Turanza T005 ?

5. Firestone Roadhawk ?

6. Kumho Ecsta HS52 ?

7. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 ?

8. BFGoodrich Advantage ? dB

9. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun ? dB

Costs

(Overall rating)

Michelin
Primacy 4

87%

Continental
EcoContact 6

83%

Kumho
Ecsta HS52

80%

Firestone
Roadhawk

79%

Kleber
Dynaxer HP4

74%

Bridgestone
Turanza T005

72%

Falken
ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun

69%

BFGoodrich
Advantage

67%

Hankook
Ventus Prime3 K125

67.3%

Rolling resistance

1. Continental EcoContact 6 100%

2. Michelin Primacy 4 92%

3. Bridgestone Turanza T005 92%

4. Firestone Roadhawk 84%

5. BFGoodrich Advantage 76%

6. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 72%

7. Kumho Ecsta HS52 63%

8. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 59%

9. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 0%

Mileage

1. Michelin Primacy 4 84%

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 79%

3. Continental EcoContact 6 77%

4. Firestone Roadhawk 74%

5. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 68%

6. Bridgestone Turanza T005 65%

7. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 64%

8. BFGoodrich Advantage 60%

9. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 0%

Fuel consumption according to EU label

1. Michelin Primacy 4 A

2. Continental EcoContact 6 A

3. Bridgestone Turanza T005 B

4. Kumho Ecsta HS52 C

5. Firestone Roadhawk C

6. BFGoodrich Advantage C

7. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 C

8. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun E

9. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 ?

Dry

(Overall rating)

Hankook
Ventus Prime3 K125

90%

Bridgestone
Turanza T005

87%

Michelin
Primacy 4

86%

Kumho
Ecsta HS52

85%

Firestone
Roadhawk

83%

Falken
ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun

79%

BFGoodrich
Advantage

76%

Kleber
Dynaxer HP4

70%

Continental
EcoContact 6

65%

Dry braking

1. Bridgestone Turanza T005 90%

2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 85%

3. Firestone Roadhawk 82%

4. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 81%

5. Michelin Primacy 4 79%

6. Continental EcoContact 6 79%

7. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 80%

8. BFGoodrich Advantage 75%

9. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 0%

Dry handling

1. Michelin Primacy 4 92%

2. Bridgestone Turanza T005 84%

3. Firestone Roadhawk 84%

4. Kumho Ecsta HS52 84%

5. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun 78%

6. BFGoodrich Advantage 76%

7. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 60%

8. Continental EcoContact 6 51%

9. Hankook Ventus Prime3 K125 0%

Add to comparison

Make

Model

Dimensions and prices

Mutual tests

Vibilagare Summer tyre test 2024 215/55 R17

Name	Points total
Best values in test	87
Kumho Ecsta HS52	84
Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun	80
Show test details

Autobild Summer tyre test 2024 205/55 R16

Name
Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Good
Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun Rating: Good
Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Good
BFGoodrich Advantage Rating: Good
Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good
Show test details

Autobild Summer tyre test 2024 205/55 R16

Name	Stopping distance on dry	Stopping distance on wet
Best values in test	35,4	25,8
Kumho Ecsta HS52	35,4	26,1
Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun	36,5	28,0
Kleber Dynaxer HP4	37,4	28,8
BFGoodrich Advantage	37,4	29,1
Firestone Roadhawk	36,6	28,7
Show test details

ADAC Summer tyre test 2024 215/55 R17

Name	Enviromental impact	Driving safety
Best values in test	1,6	1,7
Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Good	2,8	2,1
Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun Rating: Satisfactory	3,0	2,7
Show test details

Tyre Reviews Summer tyre test 2023 205/55 R16

Name
Best values in test	1
Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Recommended	1
Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun Rating: Recommended	1
Bridgestone Turanza T005 Rating: Highly recommended	1
Show test details

ADAC Summer tyre test 2023 205/55 R16

Name	Enviromental impact	Driving safety
Best values in test	1,3	1,8
Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Good	2,7	2,3
Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun Rating: Good	2,7	2,1
Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Good	2,1	2,8
BFGoodrich Advantage Rating: Good	2,8	2,9
Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good	2,7	2,8
Bridgestone Turanza T005 Rating: Good	2,4	2,2
Show test details

Autobild Summer tyre test 2022 215/55 R17

Name	Wet	Dry	Running costs
Best values in test	1	2+	1+
Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Good	2	2	2
Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun Rating: Good	1-	2+	2-
Kleber Dynaxer HP4 Rating: Satisfactory	2-	2	3+
BFGoodrich Advantage Rating: Good	2-	2+	2-
Michelin Primacy 4 Rating: Exemplary	2	1-	1-
Bridgestone Turanza T005 Rating: Good	1	2+	2-
Continental EcoContact 6 Rating: Satisfactory	2-	2	3+
Show test details

Autobild Summer tyre test 2022 215/55 R17

Name	Stopping distance on dry	Stopping distance on wet
Best values in test	35,7	27,5
Kumho Ecsta HS52	35,7	28,6
Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun	36,1	28,2
Kleber Dynaxer HP4	36,2	29,9
BFGoodrich Advantage	36,3	31
Firestone Roadhawk	37,7	32,8
Michelin Primacy 4	36,2	29,3
Bridgestone Turanza T005	35,8	27,5
Continental EcoContact 6	36,4	32,7
Show test details

Comparison: tyres similar to Kumho Ecsta HS52

Add to comparison

Add to comparison

Dimensions and prices

Mutual tests

Summer

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Winter

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Allround

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Rankings

Tests

Brands