Kumho Crugen HT51 vs Sumitomo Encounter HT2: Prepare yourselves for an epic clash of giants in the Highway All-Season tire segment: the Kumho Crugen HT51 and the Sumitomo Encounter HT2. This is the battle of experience versus innovation, pitting a classic against a fresh contender, all set on the stage of all-weather durability, performance, and safety.
Launching back in 2015, the Kumho Crugen HT51 has secured a solid reputation and a significant footprint in the segment, beloved by drivers for its consistent performance and reliability. Its years of service are a testament to its enduring quality and design. On the other hand, the Sumitomo Encounter HT2, a newer entrant launched in 2022, emerges as a promising challenger. It’s designed for drivers of pickups, SUVs, crossovers, and full-sized vans who require dependable year-round traction, a smooth, quiet ride, and a tire that caters to both daily commutes and cross-country trips.
In summary, this contest promises to be a thrilling one, a collision of Kumho Crugen HT51’s years of reliability and Sumitomo Encounter HT2’s innovative approach. As each tire brings its unique blend of design, technology, and performance to the table, the true winners of this battle will undoubtedly be the drivers who choose them.
Table of Contents
Results: Kumho Crugen HT51 vs Sumitomo Encounter HT2
Results below were taken from tire rack’s “Testing Highway All-Season Tires 2023” test. A total of 3 tires were tested this time around. The graph below shows the comparison between Kumho Crugen HT51 vs Sumitomo Encounter HT2 based on the relevant performance category. The Crugen HT51 was set as a reference hence at the 100% mark.
As both tires are categorized as all season tires, Tire Rack has planned the snow & ice in its testing portfolio. A detailed testing on snow including acceleration, braking & handling will be available only at the end of the 2023 winter season. The tire size of interest is a 265/60R18 which is a common tire size for Chevrolet Colorado & Lexus GX. You can check out our latest tire size table for more information. The testing vehicle for this tire test is a SUV in the form of 2022 Ford Explorer ST.
Wet
When it comes to wet performance, both the Kumho Crugen HT51 and the Sumitomo Encounter HT2 demonstrate exceptional capabilities, albeit with a few key distinctions.
Wet braking, a critical safety measure, shows a near parity between the two. The Kumho Crugen HT51 stops in 118.20 feet while the Sumitomo Encounter HT2 slightly edges it out with a stopping distance of 117.60 feet. This slight advantage means the Encounter HT2 may provide a marginally higher level of safety in wet conditions when it comes to sudden stops.
Wet handling, on the other hand, offers a more differentiated picture. Subjectively, the Encounter HT2 receives a higher score of 7.13 out of 10 compared to the Crugen HT51’s 6.50. This suggests that drivers feel more in control and secure with the Encounter HT2 when manoeuvring in wet conditions. Objective wet handling as indicated by lap times also favors the Encounter HT2. It posts a lap time of 34.12 seconds, outpacing the Crugen HT51 which comes in at 34.80 seconds. This faster lap time indicates that the Encounter HT2 might be able to offer better stability and quicker responsiveness in wet conditions.
Below are an in depth look on wet handling evaluation by the test drivers:
Encounter HT2:
When the track was thoroughly drenched, the Sumitomo Encounter HT2 had the opportunity to demonstrate its impressive traction capabilities, notably during quick, zigzag movements and cornering. These maneuvers closely emulate the abrupt, emergency adjustments drivers might have to make in real-life scenarios. The Encounter HT2 gave a sense of stability, providing authoritative control over the front end, allowing our testers to confidently tackle turns with reassuring mid-corner feedback, and eliminating fears of an unexpected skid or slide.
Test driver feedback on Encounter HT2
Crugen HT51:
In contrast, the Kumho Crugen HT51 held its own in terms of performance metrics, notably demonstrating commendable braking capabilities. It demanded a bit more effort to maneuver around the track, but it managed to stay competitive. However, its inconsistent steering response made it challenging to fully leverage any potential advantages it may have offered.
Test driver feedback on Crugen HT51
Overall, both tires exhibit reliable performance in wet conditions, but the Sumitomo Encounter HT2 seems to have a slight edge in wet braking and handling. However, the differences are minimal and may not be significantly perceptible in everyday driving situations. The final choice would depend on individual driving style, conditions, and preferences.
Encounter HT2 :
- +0.5% in wet braking
- +3.2% in wet handling (subj)
- +2% in wet handling (lap time)
Dry
When analyzing dry performance, the Kumho Crugen HT51 and the Sumitomo Encounter HT2 both deliver commendable results, yet show marginal differences that may influence a driver’s preference.
In terms of dry braking, a key safety metric, both tires are neck and neck. The Kumho Crugen HT51 registers a stopping distance of 90.40 feet, while the Sumitomo Encounter HT2 pulls ahead slightly with a stopping distance of 90.00 feet. This minor advantage suggests that the Encounter HT2 might offer marginally better performance in sudden stop situations on dry roads.
The dry handling subjective score reflects a driver’s perception of the tire’s performance, including factors such as steering feel, stability, and grip. Here, the Encounter HT2 again outperforms the Crugen HT51, with a score of 7.25 against the HT51’s 6.69. This suggests that drivers may feel a greater sense of control and confidence with the Encounter HT2 during dry maneuvers. In terms of dry handling lap times, an objective measure of the tire’s handling performance, the results are nearly identical. The Crugen HT51 posts a time of 32.41 seconds, whereas the Encounter HT2 is slightly slower, clocking in at 32.43 seconds. This minimal difference suggests comparable stability and responsiveness in dry conditions for both tires.
Below are an in depth look on dry handling evaluation by the test drivers:
Encounter HT2:
The Sumitomo Encounter HT2 provided consistently satisfactory steering, featuring an appropriate weight, although it fell short of the precision our testers would have liked. Its steady and balanced demeanor effectively conveyed the available traction when entering a turn. However, careful throttle control was needed to prevent the tire from drifting wide on corner exits.
Test driver feedback on Encounter HT2
Crugen HT51:
In contrast, Kumho’s Crugen HT51 performed satisfactorily under dry conditions, offering competitive traction. Although there was ample grip, the steering responsiveness didn’t allow our testers to fully exploit this feature. When making quick slalom changes or cornering, the steering felt inefficient, with an excess of movement before responding to input, indicating a clear area for improvement.
Test driver feedback on Crugen HT51
In conclusion, while both tires demonstrate strong dry performance, the Sumitomo Encounter HT2 pulls ahead slightly in dry braking and subjective handling. However, the Kumho Crugen HT51 matches up closely, even slightly surpassing the Encounter HT2 in objective dry handling. Your ultimate choice should align with personal driving habits, conditions, and preferences.
Encounter HT2 :
- +0.4% in dry braking
- +2.8% in dry handling (subj)
- -0.1% in dry handling (lap time)
Noise/Comfort/Ride Quality
Examining the noise performance and ride quality of the Kumho Crugen HT51 and the Sumitomo Encounter HT2, both tires display a notable capacity to deliver comfort and quietness, but with some slight variations that can impact a driver’s overall experience. In terms of ride quality, which involves factors like vibration and harshness, the Encounter HT2 takes the lead with a score of 8, compared to the Crugen HT51’s slightly lower score of 7.68. This indicates that drivers might experience a smoother and more comfortable ride with the Encounter HT2.
Regarding noise, an essential aspect of overall driving comfort, the Encounter HT2 again shows a slight edge with a score of 7.63, while the Crugen HT51 comes in very close behind with a score of 7.5. Although both tires maintain a quiet ride, the Encounter HT2 seems to provide a marginally quieter experience. Steering and road handling, often linked with noise and ride quality as aspects of driving comfort, present another advantage for the Encounter HT2. It earns a score of 7.25 against the Crugen HT51’s 6.88, implying that the Encounter HT2 might offer a slightly better feel in terms of responsiveness and stability.
When considering the average of ride quality, noise, and steering and road handling, the Encounter HT2 secures the lead with a score of 7.63, compared to the Crugen HT51’s 7.35. This suggests that, overall, the Encounter HT2 might deliver a more comfortable and quieter ride with superior steering and road handling. However, the differences in performance are minimal, and both tires are strong competitors in this category. The ultimate choice will depend on individual driver’s sensitivity to noise, preferred ride comfort, and specific driving conditions.
Encounter HT2:
- +1.4% in average of Noise, Comfort & Ride Quality.
Ice & Snow
As we eagerly anticipate the upcoming winter season of 2023, ice and snow performance testing of the Kumho Crugen HT51 and Sumitomo Encounter HT2 tires will be a focal point. Since we believe that tires should not only be evaluated on dry and wet roads but also in challenging ice and snow conditions, we are eager to put both these tires to the test in these tough weather conditions.
While both these tires are highly rated in their category, there is an interesting distinction to consider. The Kumho Crugen HT51 bears the Three-Peak Mountain Snowflake (3PMSF) symbol, a standard recognized in the tire industry that guarantees the tire has been tested and meets specific snow traction performance requirements. On the other hand, the Sumitomo Encounter HT2 does not carry this designation.
While this does not necessarily mean the Encounter HT2 will underperform, it does mean that the Crugen HT51 has met certain industry standards for snow and ice performance that the Encounter HT2 has not. Given this distinction, we fully expect the Kumho Crugen HT51 to have a significant advantage in snow and ice conditions.
However, the real test will be how these tires perform in actual winter conditions. Stay tuned as we conduct thorough ice and snow performance testing. We are committed to delivering comprehensive, real-world insights to ensure you make the best tire choice for your winter driving needs.
UTQG rating
The UTQG (Uniform Tire Quality Grading) ratings and warranty mileage values provide critical insights into the expected longevity, traction, and temperature resistance of a tire. In comparing the Kumho Crugen HT51 and the Sumitomo Encounter HT2, we see important differences.
| Brand | Tireline | Size | Tread Wear | Traction | Temperature |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kumho | Crugen HT51 | All | 720 | A | A |
| Sumitomo | Encounter HT2 | All | 640 | A | B |
Looking at the UTQG ratings, the Kumho Crugen HT51 showcases superior treadwear with a rating of 720 compared to the Encounter HT2’s 640. This implies that the Crugen HT51 is expected to last longer, offering higher mileage before the tread wears down.
Both tires receive an ‘A’ rating for traction, suggesting that they perform similarly well in terms of grip and stopping ability on wet surfaces. However, when it comes to temperature resistance, the Crugen HT51 again takes the lead with an ‘A’ rating, indicating better resistance to heat buildup than the Encounter HT2’s ‘B’ rating. Higher temperature resistance often correlates with longer tire life, further supporting the longevity claim of the Crugen HT51.
In terms of warranty mileage, the Crugen HT51 promises 6 years or 70,000 miles for Euro and P-Metric sizes, and 6 years or 45,000 miles for LT-Metric sizes. On the other hand, the Encounter HT2 comes with a 5-year or 60,000-mile warranty, with no warranty applicable if the rear tire size is different from the front.
From these specifications, we can conclude that the Kumho Crugen HT51 is expected to deliver a higher mileage due to its superior treadwear rating and longer warranty coverage. Therefore, it might be a better choice for drivers prioritizing durability and longevity in their tires. However, individual driving habits, conditions, and maintenance practices will also significantly affect the actual mileage and lifespan of the tires.
Price
In terms of pricing, the Kumho Crugen HT51 and the Sumitomo Encounter HT2 for the tire size 265/60R18 are incredibly close competitors. The Crugen HT51 is priced at $206, while the Encounter HT2 is marginally cheaper, listed at $205.
Tire size: 265/60R18
- Crugen HT51: $206
- Encounter HT2 : $205
Difference: -0.5% more cheaper for Encounter HT2.
This marginal difference, amounting to a 0.5% cheaper price for the Encounter HT2, is unlikely to be a significant deciding factor for most consumers given the minimal price variation. The difference of just $1 means that your choice between these two tires should primarily be based on their performance characteristics and your specific driving needs and preferences.
While the Encounter HT2 does hold a slight edge in terms of pricing, it is important to note that the value of a tire is not solely defined by its cost but also by factors such as its performance, longevity, and the driving comfort it offers. It’s crucial to take all these considerations into account when making your final decision.
Summary
In conclusion, both the Kumho Crugen HT51 and the Sumitomo Encounter HT2 demonstrate strong performances in their respective categories, with each bringing their unique strengths to the table. The Encounter HT2 stood out with its commendable traction, particularly in sharp maneuvers and cornering, and its balanced behavior on wet surfaces. However, its steering precision left room for improvement and needed careful throttle control on corner exits.
On the other hand, the Crugen HT51 was competitive in terms of dry traction and braking, but its non-linear steering behavior could be a potential area of improvement. Despite this, it has shown strong indications of expected longevity, with a higher treadwear rating and longer warranty coverage, promising value over time.Price-wise, both tires are competitively priced, with only a marginal difference, implying that your choice should be more dependent on their performance attributes and your specific driving requirements. While we are eager to test these tires further in challenging winter conditions, based on the Crugen HT51’s Three-Peak Mountain Snowflake designation, we anticipate a dominant performance from Kumho in snow and ice conditions.
Ultimately, choosing between these two tires comes down to your individual needs, preferences, and the specific conditions in which you’ll be driving. Stay tuned for further tests and reviews as we continue to provide you with comprehensive, real-world insights to assist you in making the best tire choice for your driving needs.