18 Shops · 56,847+ Products

Comparison: BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER vs. Kumho Ecsta HS52 vs. Continental PremiumContact 6

Test Profile

BFGoodrich
ACTIVAN WINTER
Kumho
Ecsta HS52
Continental
PremiumContact 6
Number of tests
1
10
36
Best position
#13
#2
#1
Average position
13.0
6.0
3.1
Latest test
2019
2026
2023
Available sizes
15
104
296

Wet

Wet
Kumho Ecsta HS52
77%
Continental PremiumContact 6
84%
Wet circle cornering
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
61%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
89%
Continental PremiumContact 6
87%
Wet handling
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
23%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
79%
Continental PremiumContact 6
87%
Aquaplaning - cross
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
67%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
66%
Continental PremiumContact 6
68%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
56%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
73%
Continental PremiumContact 6
79%
Wet performance
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
29%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
55%
Continental PremiumContact 6
90%
Wet braking
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
40%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
80%
Continental PremiumContact 6
91%

Dry

Dry
Kumho Ecsta HS52
87%
Continental PremiumContact 6
90%
Dry driving behavior
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
53%
Continental PremiumContact 6
81%
Dry performance
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
61%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
72%
Continental PremiumContact 6
78%
Dry braking
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
82%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
89%
Continental PremiumContact 6
92%

Comfort

Comfort
Kumho Ecsta HS52
77%
Continental PremiumContact 6
79%
Exterior noise
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
71%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
73%
Continental PremiumContact 6
66%
Interior noise
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
60%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
71%
Continental PremiumContact 6
80%

Costs

Costs
Kumho Ecsta HS52
76%
Continental PremiumContact 6
79%
Mileage
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
89%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
79%
Continental PremiumContact 6
85%
Fuel efficiency
BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER
91%
Continental PremiumContact 6
83%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison