18 Shops · 56,847+ Products

Comparison: Apollo Amazer 4G ECO vs. BFGoodrich Advantage vs. Kumho Ecsta HS52

Test Profile

Apollo
Amazer 4G ECO
BFGoodrich
Advantage
Kumho
Ecsta HS52
Number of tests
1
14
10
Best position
#6
#8
#2
Average position
6.0
13.4
6.0
Latest test
2018
2026
2026
Available sizes
25
153
104

Wet

Wet
Apollo Amazer 4G ECO
70%
BFGoodrich Advantage
61%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
77%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Apollo Amazer 4G ECO
72%
BFGoodrich Advantage
61%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
73%
Wet braking
Apollo Amazer 4G ECO
86%
BFGoodrich Advantage
77%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
80%
Wet circle cornering
Apollo Amazer 4G ECO
61%
BFGoodrich Advantage
69%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
89%
Aquaplaning - cross
Apollo Amazer 4G ECO
83%
BFGoodrich Advantage
53%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
66%
Wet handling
Apollo Amazer 4G ECO
50%
BFGoodrich Advantage
57%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
79%

Comfort

Comfort
Apollo Amazer 4G ECO
63%
BFGoodrich Advantage
79%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
77%
Exterior noise
Apollo Amazer 4G ECO
50%
BFGoodrich Advantage
68%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
73%

Dry

Dry
Apollo Amazer 4G ECO
86%
BFGoodrich Advantage
72%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
87%

Costs

Costs
Apollo Amazer 4G ECO
79%
BFGoodrich Advantage
68%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
76%
Mileage
Apollo Amazer 4G ECO
72%
BFGoodrich Advantage
63%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
79%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison