Michelin Primacy 4+ vs Kumho Ecsta HS52: In the touring tire segment, the Michelin Primacy 4+ stands tall with its renowned grip, durability, and comfort. Meanwhile, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 has been rapidly improving, making notable gains in performance over recent years. As Kumho’s new contender, can the HS52 rise to the challenge and dethrone Michelin’s reigning champion? The battle for touring tire supremacy is heating up!
Table of Contents
Results: Michelin Primacy 4+ vs Kumho Ecsta HS52
The results featured here are from the 2024 ADAC Summer Tire Test, with 16 model of the finest tires were tested. Wear bring a extremely priced and expensive test were provided to our delight. The accompanying graph presents a side-by-side comparison of the Michelin Primacy 4+ vs Kumho Ecsta HS52 across various performance categories, with the Michelin Primacy 4+ serving as the benchmark at the 100% mark.
The tire size of interest is the 215/55R17 tire size, a popular choice for vehicles like the Honda HRV and Hyundai Kona Electric. For further insights into various tire sizes, feel free to consult our latest tire size table. The tests were conducted using a standard Volkswagen T-Roc as the test vehicle.
Wet
In wet conditions, the Michelin Primacy 4+ excels, stopping from 100 km/h in just 31.1 meters, while the Kumho Ecsta HS52 takes 32.8 meters—a difference of 1.7 meters. When it comes to handling water on the road, the Primacy 4+ can navigate through standing water at a higher speed, slipping at 75.3 km/h compared to the Ecsta HS52’s 73.8 km/h. This shows the Michelin offers better overall wet performance, providing quicker stops and superior aquaplaning resistance.
Ecsta HS52 :
- -5% in wet braking
- -2% in straight aquaplaning
Dry
On dry roads, the Michelin Primacy 4+ stops from 100 km/h in 37.3 meters, slightly outperforming the Kumho Ecsta HS52, which takes 38.1 meters to stop—a difference of 0.8 meters. This marginal advantage gives the Michelin a slight edge in dry braking performance over the Kumho.
Ecsta HS52 :
- -2% in dry braking
Wear
Michelin has long been a leader in mileage performance, with the Primacy 4+ traditionally setting high standards. However, in a surprising twist, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 outperformed it in recent tests. The Ecsta HS52 delivered an impressive 69,300 kilometers of wear, surpassing the Primacy 4+’s 60,300 kilometers by 9,000 kilometers. Despite the Michelin’s excellent track record, the Kumho emerged as the highest mileage tire in the test
However, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 showed a downside with its higher abrasion rate of 55 mg/km/t, compared to the Primacy 4+’s 48.1 mg/km/t, indicating it wears down faster per kilometer. Despite this, the Kumho’s overall mileage performance still surpasses Michelin’s.
Interestingly, the balance between its wet performance and higher mileage actually works in Kumho’s favor, offering a compelling advantage in the long run.
Ecsta HS52 :
- +15% in mileage
- -13% in abrasion
Noise
In terms of noise performance, the Michelin Primacy 4+ is quieter, producing 70.7 dB compared to the Kumho Ecsta HS52’s 72.6 dB. This difference of 1.9 dB means the Michelin offers a more silent and comfortable driving experience than the Kumho.
Ecsta HS52 :
- -3% in exterior noise (+1.9 dB)
Fuel Consumption
When it comes to fuel consumption, the Michelin Primacy 4+ is slightly more efficient, using 5.8 liters per 100 km, while the Kumho Ecsta HS52 consumes 5.9 liters per 100 km. This small difference of 0.1 liters per 100 km makes the Michelin a bit more economical in fuel usage compared to the Kumho.
Ecsta HS52 :
- -2% in fuel consumption
Price
For the 215/55 R17 size, the Michelin Primacy 4+ costs €154, while the Kumho Ecsta HS52 is priced at €100. This makes the Kumho tire 54% cheaper than the Michelin, offering a significant cost saving.
Tire size: 215/55 R17
- Primacy 4+ : € 154
- Ecsta HS52 : € 100
Difference: -54% more cheaper for Ecsta HS52
Summary
As a tire expert, evaluating the Michelin Primacy 4+ and Kumho Ecsta HS52 has revealed notable strengths in each. The Michelin Primacy 4+ stands out with superior wet and dry braking, quieter operation, and slightly better fuel efficiency. These attributes make it a top choice for those prioritizing performance and comfort.
However, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 has made remarkable strides, particularly in balancing wet performance with exceptional mileage. Despite being marginally less effective in wet and dry braking and slightly noisier, the Kumho excels in longevity, delivering significantly higher mileage. This is a testament to Kumho’s impressive advancements in managing the trade-off between wet performance and tire wear.
Moreover, the substantial price difference cannot be overlooked. The Kumho Ecsta HS52, at 54% less than the Michelin, presents a compelling value proposition for budget-conscious drivers. It offers excellent overall performance at a more affordable price point. Considering these factors, the Ecsta HS52 is an attractive option for those seeking both quality and value.
Dr Edwin Pang