18 shops · 56 ·847+ products

Comparison: BF Goodrich g-Grip vs. Kleber Dynaxer HP4 vs. Kumho Ecsta HS52

Test Profile

BF
Goodrich g-Grip
Kleber
Dynaxer HP4
Kumho
Ecsta HS52
Number of tests
6
11
10
Best position
#6
#1
#2
Average position
19.3
11.6
6.0
Latest test
2019
2024
2026
Available sizes
4
122
109

Wet

Wet
BF Goodrich g-Grip
88%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
62%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
79%
Aquaplaning - cross
BF Goodrich g-Grip
78%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
64%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
68%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
BF Goodrich g-Grip
87%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
70%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
77%
Wet circle cornering
BF Goodrich g-Grip
98%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
63%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
72%
Wet handling
BF Goodrich g-Grip
89%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
56%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
80%

Costs

Costs
BF Goodrich g-Grip
71%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
76%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
69%
Price/value
BF Goodrich g-Grip
68%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
75%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
97%
Rolling resistance
BF Goodrich g-Grip
64%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
78%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
70%
Mileage
BF Goodrich g-Grip
88%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
66%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
54%

Comfort

Comfort
BF Goodrich g-Grip
64%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
77%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
80%
Exterior noise
BF Goodrich g-Grip
64%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
81%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
81%

Dry

Dry
BF Goodrich g-Grip
94%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
70%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
85%
Dry handling
BF Goodrich g-Grip
94%
Kleber Dynaxer HP4
66%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
79%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison