Segment
1. Michelin Pilot Sport 4 Premium2. Kumho Ecsta PS71 Upper-middle
Comparison: Kumho Ecsta PS71 vs. Michelin Pilot Sport 4
Table of contents:
| # | Kumho Ecsta PS71
| Michelin Pilot Sport 4
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R16 - R22 | R16 - R21 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
Today, we will compare two popular summer tyres, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 and the Michelin Pilot Sport 4, based on data from tyre tests conducted by Autobild and ADAC. It's essential to know the strengths and weaknesses of each tyre to choose the best one for your vehicle.
The Kumho Ecsta PS71 didn't have a previous model, while the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 is a successor to the Michelin Pilot Sport 3. The Pilot Sport 4 was recently replaced with the Michelin Pilot Sport 5.
In terms of overall rating, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 definitely outshines the Kumho Ecsta PS71, with a rating of 94% compared to Kumho's 79%. Let's now dive deeper into their test results from Autobild and ADAC.
Autobild Test Results
Out of 53 tyres tested by Autobild, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 secured an impressive 2nd position, showcasing excellent performance in aquaplaning (longitudal and cross), dry braking, and wet handling. On the other hand, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 ranked 18th in the test.
ADAC Test Results
From 16 tyres tested by ADAC, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 again held the 2nd position, excelling in dry braking and mileage. Meanwhile, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 placed 10th and its best features were noted as aquaplaning (cross and longitudal).
Strengths and Weaknesses
The Kumho Ecsta PS71 has the following key strengths:
- Good aquaplaning resistance, both longitudal and cross
However, its weaknesses include:
- Lower overall rating (79%)
- Lower test positions in both Autobild and ADAC
The Michelin Pilot Sport 4 boasts several strengths:
- Impressive aquaplaning resistance (longitudal and cross)
- Excellent dry braking
- Great wet handling
- High mileage
It's worth mentioning this tyre is no longer available, as it was replaced by the Michelin Pilot Sport 5.
In conclusion, based on the data from the mentioned tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 is the superior choice in terms of overall performance, especially if considering safety and handling. However, if your main concern is aquaplaning resistance, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 may fit your requirements. It's crucial to consider the test results, your driving style, and preferences when choosing the right tyre for your vehicle.
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. Kumho Ecsta PS71 Highly recommended2. Michelin Pilot Sport 4 Highly recommended
Worst rating in test
2. 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
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
Dry handling
Offroad
(Overall rating)Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Rolling resistance
Mileage
Price/value
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Wet | Dry | Running costs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1 | 1- | 1 | ||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Conditionally recommended | 1 | 2 | 3- | ||||
| Michelin Pilot Sport 4 Rating: Exemplary | 1- | 1- | 2- | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 32,1 | 28,7 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 | 34,9 | 29 | |||||
| Michelin Pilot Sport 4 | 32,1 | 29,8 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1,7 | 1,3 | 2,8 | 2,0 | 1,6 | ||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Satisfactory | 2,3 | 2,4 | 3,3 | 3,0 | 2,0 | ||
| Michelin Pilot Sport 4 Rating: Good | 2,0 | 1,9 | 2,9 | 2,0 | 1,9 | ||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Running costs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Satisfactory | 2 | 2- | 3- | ||||
| Michelin Pilot Sport 4 Rating: Exemplary | 1 | 1 | 1- | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,2 | 28,7 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 | 37,1 | 31,6 | |||||
| Michelin Pilot Sport 4 | 34,2 | 29,6 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
