Looking for a comparison of Falken Azenis FK510 to tyres that are made in similar dimensions? Here you can find detailed information based on tests, reviews and manufacturer's data.
In this article, we will be comparing two popular summer tyres: the Falken Azenis FK510 and the Kumho Ecsta PS71. Both tyres have been put to the test in various competitions, and we will summarize the results from these tests, focusing on their strengths and weaknesses so you can determine which tyre is best suited for your needs.
The Falken Azenis FK510 is a high-performance summer tyre with a rating of 90% on our website. It is made by Japan and Turkey based tyre manufacturer Falken and has been replaced by the Falken Azenis FK520. On the other hand, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 is also a summer tyre with a rating of 79% on our website, produced by Kumho, and there hasn't been a newer model that replaced it yet.
Comparing their test results, we can see that the Falken Azenis FK510 performed better overall. In the ADAC test, the Falken tyre ranked 8th out of 16 competitors, while the Kumho tyre ranked 10th. The Azenis FK510's best features in this test were interior noise, wet handling, and mileage. Kumho Ecsta PS71's strengths lie in its aquaplaning performance, both in cross and longitudinal tests.
In the Autobild test, the Falken Azenis FK510 scored even better, ranking 6th out of 53 total tyres, with standout features such as exterior noise, price/value, and rolling resistance. Meanwhile, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 ranked 18th in the same competition, without any specific best features mentioned.
Lastly, in the ACE test, the Falken Azenis FK510 outperformed the competition, ranking 1st out of 11 tyres, with top marks in dry driving behavior, dry handling, exterior noise, wet braking, and wet handling. The Kumho Ecsta PS71 came in a close second, with its best features being aquaplaning performance and exterior noise.
In summary, the Falken Azenis FK510 is the better tyre among the two, performing exceptionally well in both dry and wet driving conditions. Its strengths include great noise performance, handling, and mileage. However, it has a slightly higher fuel consumption compared to the Kumho Ecsta PS71. The Kumho Ecsta PS71 performs well in aquaplaning resistance and noise performance but has no other notable strengths. Therefore, if you are looking for a high-performance summer tyre with excellent handling and noise performance, the Falken Azenis FK510 is the clear winner. However, if aquaplaning resistance is your main concern, you might want to consider the Kumho Ecsta PS71 as a viable alternative.
1. Goodyear Eagle F1 Supersport Premium2. Dunlop SP Sport MAXX RT2 Premium3. Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 Premium4. Falken Azenis FK510 Upper-middle5. Kumho Ecsta PS71 Upper-middle6. Uniroyal RainSport 5 Upper-middle7. Firestone Roadhawk Upper-middle8. Fulda SportControl 2 Lowcost9. Sava Intensa UHP 2 Lowcost
5. Kumho Ecsta PS71 9.337. Sava Intensa UHP 2 11.319. Uniroyal RainSport 5 15.83
1. Fulda SportControl 2 Exemplary2. Firestone Roadhawk Exemplary3. Falken Azenis FK510 Exemplary4. Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 Exemplary5. Kumho Ecsta PS71 Highly recommended6. Dunlop SP Sport MAXX RT2 Highly recommended9. Sava Intensa UHP 2 Satisfactory
2. Falken Azenis FK510 Recommended3. Uniroyal RainSport 5 Satisfactory4. Fulda SportControl 2 Satisfactory5. Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 Satisfactory6. Firestone Roadhawk Conditionally recommended7. Kumho Ecsta PS71 Conditionally recommended8. Dunlop SP Sport MAXX RT2 Still recommended9. Sava Intensa UHP 2 Still recommended
1. Falken Azenis FK510 69 dB
| Name | Wet | Dry | Noise | Wear | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2,0 | 1,5 | 2,6 | 1,5 | |||
| Falken Azenis FK510 Rating: Good | 2,0 | 1,9 | 2,8 | 2,0 | |||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Good | 2,2 | 2,5 | 3,2 | 2,0 | |||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Poor | 4,9 | 2,8 | 3,0 | 2,5 | |||
| Dunlop SP Sport MAXX RT2 Rating: Satisfactory | 2,8 | 1,8 | 2,8 | 2,5 | |||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 Rating: Satisfactory | 3,1 | 2,0 | 2,6 | 2,5 | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Running costs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1 | 1- | 1 | ||||
| Falken Azenis FK510 Rating: Exemplary | 2 | 2 | 1- | ||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Conditionally recommended | 1 | 2 | 3- | ||||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Good | 2+ | 2 | 2- | ||||
| Dunlop SP Sport MAXX RT2 Rating: Satisfactory | 2- | 2 | 2 | ||||
| Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 Rating: Satisfactory | 2+ | 2+ | 3+ | ||||
| Fulda SportControl 2 Rating: Good | 2 | 2+ | 2- | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 32,1 | 28,7 | |||||
| Falken Azenis FK510 | 36 | 30,7 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 | 34,9 | 29 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 34,3 | 30,8 | |||||
| Dunlop SP Sport MAXX RT2 | 34,3 | 33 | |||||
| Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 | 34,7 | 30,3 | |||||
| Fulda SportControl 2 | 34,2 | 31,7 | |||||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 | 34,7 | 35,5 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1,7 | 1,3 | 2,8 | 2,0 | 1,6 | ||
| Falken Azenis FK510 Rating: Satisfactory | 2,4 | 2,9 | 3,0 | 2,0 | 2,0 | ||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Satisfactory | 2,3 | 2,4 | 3,3 | 3,0 | 2,0 | ||
| Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 Rating: Satisfactory | 3,1 | 2,0 | 3,4 | 2,5 | 1,8 | ||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 Rating: Satisfactory | 2,7 | 1,8 | 3,1 | 2,0 | 1,6 | ||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Running costs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Falken Azenis FK510 Rating: Exemplary | 1- | 2+ | 2 | ||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Satisfactory | 2 | 2- | 3- | ||||
| Firestone Roadhawk Rating: Satisfactory | 3+ | 2- | 2- | ||||
| Dunlop SP Sport MAXX RT2 Rating: Good | 2- | 2+ | 2 | ||||
| Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 Rating: Exemplary | 2+ | 1- | 2 | ||||
| Fulda SportControl 2 Rating: Exemplary | 2 | 2+ | 2 | ||||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 Rating: Good | 2- | 2+ | 1- | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,2 | 28,7 | |||||
| Falken Azenis FK510 | 36 | 29 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 | 37,1 | 31,6 | |||||
| Firestone Roadhawk | 35,2 | 32 | |||||
| Dunlop SP Sport MAXX RT2 | 35,4 | 31,4 | |||||
| Hankook Ventus S1 evo3 K127 | 35,2 | 28,7 | |||||
| Fulda SportControl 2 | 35,1 | 32 | |||||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 | 35,7 | 32,8 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Points total | Wet | Dry | Rolling resistance | Noise | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 150 | 55 | 39 | 14 | 7 | ||
| Falken Azenis FK510 Rating: Recommended | 150 | 66 | 46 | 16 | 9 | ||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Recommended | 149 | 67 | 44 | 14 | 9 | ||
| Show test details | |||||||
