Comparison: Apollo Amazer 4G ECO vs. BFGoodrich Advantage vs. Kumho WinterCraft WP52

Budget

Apollo

Amazer 4G ECO

R13 – R15

VS

Upper-middle

BFGoodrich

Advantage

WinterCraft WP52

5.5

R13 – R21

Also compare with

PILOT ALPIN 5

WinterContact TS 870

Ventus Evo

Test Profile

Amazer 4G ECO

Advantage

WinterCraft WP52

Number of tests

1

14

10

Best position

#6

#8

#2

Average position

6.0

13.4

12.2

Latest test

2018

2026

2024

Available sizes

25

153

207

Wet

Apollo Amazer 4G ECO

70%

BFGoodrich Advantage

61%

Kumho WinterCraft WP52

70%

Wet braking

Apollo Amazer 4G ECO

86%

BFGoodrich Advantage

77%

Kumho WinterCraft WP52

78%

Wet circle cornering

Apollo Amazer 4G ECO

61%

BFGoodrich Advantage

69%

Kumho WinterCraft WP52

61%

Aquaplaning - cross

Apollo Amazer 4G ECO

83%

BFGoodrich Advantage

53%

Kumho WinterCraft WP52

56%

Wet handling

Apollo Amazer 4G ECO

50%

BFGoodrich Advantage

57%

Kumho WinterCraft WP52

77%

Aquaplaning - longitudal

Apollo Amazer 4G ECO

72%

BFGoodrich Advantage

61%

Kumho WinterCraft WP52

64%

Dry

Apollo Amazer 4G ECO

86%

BFGoodrich Advantage

72%

Kumho WinterCraft WP52

73%

Costs

Apollo Amazer 4G ECO

79%

BFGoodrich Advantage

68%

Kumho WinterCraft WP52

70%

Mileage

Apollo Amazer 4G ECO

72%

BFGoodrich Advantage

63%

Kumho WinterCraft WP52

72%

Comfort

Apollo Amazer 4G ECO

63%

BFGoodrich Advantage

79%

Kumho WinterCraft WP52

62%

Exterior noise

Apollo Amazer 4G ECO

50%

BFGoodrich Advantage

68%

Kumho WinterCraft WP52

60%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Comparison: Apollo Amazer 4G ECO vs. BFGoodrich Advantage vs. Kumho WinterCraft WP52

Amazer 4G ECO

Advantage

WinterCraft WP52

Test Profile

Wet

Dry

Costs

Comfort

Dimensions and prices

Add to comparison