Segment
1. Kleber Dynaxer UHP Upper-middle2. Kumho Ecsta PS71 Upper-middle
Comparison: Kleber Dynaxer UHP vs. Kumho Ecsta PS71
Table of contents:
| # | Kleber Dynaxer UHP
| Kumho Ecsta PS71
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R17 - R20 | R16 - R22 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
When comparing the Kleber Dynaxer UHP and the Kumho Ecsta PS71, it is clear that each has its own strengths and weaknesses. Both models are designed for summer driving, which means they perform optimally in warm, dry conditions.
The Kleber Dynaxer UHP stands out for its quiet exterior noise, a feature that makes driving more comfortable and enjoyable. However, Autobild tests have revealed some potential issues. The tyre ranks 15 out of 53, with criticisms aimed at its moderate grip and limited aquaplaning reserves when driving in the wet. Despite this, it does offer good mileage and low rolling resistance, making it a cost-effective choice for long-term driving. In terms of our general rating, this model scores a 68%.
Kumho's Ecsta PS71, on the other hand, scored slightly better with a rating of 72%. In testing, this tyre demonstrated a balanced high performance potential with good handling characteristics, which contributed to its 18th place ranking out of 53. It also boasts short braking distances on both wet and dry surfaces and offers a fair price. However, this model does have a slightly higher exterior noise level.
In the Autobild 2023 trial, additional qualitative insights were shared. For Kleber Dynaxer UHP, its good mileage and quiet rolling noise were once again mentioned as key strengths. However, some drawbacks like mediocre grip and poor lateral control in wet conditions were reported. As for the Kumho Ecsta PS71, its fair price and high performance balanced with good handling qualities were accentuated, but it was also pointed out that it creates more driving noise.
Ultimately, the choice between the Kleber Dynaxer UHP and the Kumho Ecsta PS71 depends upon personal driving preferences and conditions. If peace and quiet are paramount and you mostly travel on dry roads, the Kleber Dynaxer UHP would be a solid choice. Otherwise, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 offers better overall performance, especially in wet conditions. Both the Kleber and the Kumho are quality tyre manufacturers with solid reputations, offering reliable and efficient products for all drivers..
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
1. Kumho Ecsta PS71 9.33
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Kumho Ecsta PS71 Highly recommended2. Kleber Dynaxer UHP Satisfactory
Worst rating in test
1. Kleber Dynaxer UHP Satisfactory2. Kumho Ecsta PS71 Conditionally recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet handling
Aquaplaning - cross
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Wet braking
Wet circle cornering
Wet braking according to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Price/value
Rolling resistance
Mileage
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry handling
Dry braking
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | vynikající | 2+ | 1- | 1 | |||
| Kleber Dynaxer UHP Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 3+ | 2- | 2 | |||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Good | dobré | 2 | 2- | 2- | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 58.1 | 24.8 | |||||
| Kleber Dynaxer UHP | 64.5 | 28 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 | 61.7 | 26.6 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | příkladné | 1 | 1- | 1 | |||
| Kleber Dynaxer UHP Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 3+ | 2 | 2 | |||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Conditionally recommended | podmíněně doporučeno | 1 | 2 | 3- | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 32,1 | 28,7 | |||||
| Kleber Dynaxer UHP | 34,1 | 32,2 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 | 34,9 | 29 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | příkladné | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||
| Kleber Dynaxer UHP Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 3+ | 2 | 2 | |||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 2 | 2- | 3- | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,2 | 28,7 | |||||
| Kleber Dynaxer UHP | 35,9 | 32,1 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 | 37,1 | 31,6 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
