Segment
1. Michelin Energy Saver + Premium2. Kumho EcowinG ES01 KH27 Upper-middle
Comparison: Kumho EcowinG ES01 KH27 vs. Michelin Energy Saver +
Table of contents:
| # | Kumho EcowinG ES01 KH27
| Michelin Energy Saver +
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R14 - R17 | ||
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
We present you a comparison of two summer tyres: the Kumho EcowinG ES01 KH27 and the Michelin Energy Saver +. Both of these models are well-known offerings from their respective manufacturers, Kumho and Michelin. This comparison is based on our rating system and test results from Autobild and ADAC.
Starting with the Kumho EcowinG ES01 KH27, this summer tyre has shown commendable performance in test conditions. It ranked 28th out of 51 tyres in the Autobild test, outperforming several competitors. In the ADAC test, the tyre moved up significantly, securing the 7th position among 16 tested tyres. Despite not placing first, these positions demonstrate a good overall performance and reliability of the EcowinG ES01 KH27. However, it's important to note that this model hasn't been rated by us and doesn't have any previous models or newer versions.
On the other hand, the Michelin Energy Saver + has also shown solid results. It managed to secure the 15th position out of 51 tyres in the Autobild test, and the 10th position among 16 tyres at the ADAC test. These results suggest good, but not excellent performance. Similar to the Kumho tyre, the Energy Saver + has neither previous models nor newer replacements and is unrated by us.
Regarding test results and positions, the Kumho EcowinG ES01 KH27 surpasses the Michelin Energy Saver + in terms of performance and ranking in most tests. However, neither tyre secures a top-ranking position, indicating both have areas for improvement.
In conclusion, both tyres offer a solid option for those seeking a reliable summer tyre. The Kumho EcowinG ES01 KH27 shines with its overall good performance and climbing positions in tests, while the Michelin Energy Saver + provides a consistent, albeit not top-tier, performance. Neither tyre has an indication of being replaced with a newer model, suggesting both manufacturers retain confidence in these products.
This assessment should help vehicle owners make an informed decision based on data from common tyre tests and their specific driving needs. As with any automotive purchase, individual necessities, and driving conditions will dictate the best choice.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Michelin Energy Saver + Exemplary
Worst rating in test
2. Michelin Energy Saver + Satisfactory
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Outside noise accoring to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,5 | 34,3 | |||||
| Kumho EcowinG ES01 KH27 | 38,3 | 40,4 | |||||
| Michelin Energy Saver + | 37,5 | 38,7 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Wear | Comfort | Fuel consumption | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | chvalitebné | 1,9 | 1,5 | 0,5 | 1,5 | 1,6 | |
| Kumho EcowinG ES01 KH27 Rating: Good | dobré | 2,7 | 2,3 | 3,0 | 3,2 | 1,8 | |
| Michelin Energy Saver + Rating: Good | dobré | 3,0 | 1,9 | 0,5 | 3,2 | 1,8 | |
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Wear | Comfort | Fuel consumption | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | dobré | 2,0 | 1,6 | 1,0 | 1,7 | 1,6 | |
| Kumho EcowinG ES01 KH27 Rating: Good | dobré | 2,4 | 1,9 | 2,5 | 3,2 | 2,1 | |
| Michelin Energy Saver + Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 2,8 | 2,1 | 1,0 | 3,5 | 1,6 | |
| Show test details | |||||||
