Segment
1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Upper-middle2. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun Upper-middle
Comparison: Kumho Ecsta HS52 vs. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun
Table of contents:
| # | Kumho Ecsta HS52
| Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R14 - R18 | R14 - R22 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
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.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 5.67
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun Exemplary2. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Good
Worst rating in test
1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Good2. Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun Still recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Aquaplaning - cross
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Wet braking
Wet circle cornering
Wet handling
Wet braking according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
Comfort
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Rolling resistance
Mileage
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
Dry handling
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Points total | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 87 | ||||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 | 84 | ||||||
| Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun | 80 | ||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Good | |||||||
| Falken ZIEX ZE310 Ecorun Rating: Good | |||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| 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 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| 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 | |||||||
| Name | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1 | ||||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Recommended | 1 | ||||||
| Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun Rating: Recommended | 1 | ||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| 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 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| 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- | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| 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 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
