Comparison: Kumho Ecsta HS52 vs. Hankook Ventus Prime 4 vs. Bridgestone Turanza T005

The comparison below focuses on real-world test results and independent reviews for the Kumho Ecsta HS52 (successor to the Ecsta HS51) and the Hankook Ventus Prime 4 (successor to the Ventus Prime3 K125). For manufacturer information see Kumho and Hankook. Neither model in the data set has been reported as replaced by a newer generation.

Test summary & mutual ranking

• Overall internal ratings: Kumho 74% vs Hankook 71% — Kumho holds a small lead.


• ADAC (50 tyres): Kumho finished 8th, Hankook 9th — a very close result with a slight edge to Kumho for wet cornering and mileage.


• Autobild series: mixed results — in one Autobild listing Hankook placed 2nd while Kumho was 3rd; other Autobild reports praise both for short wet/dry braking and balanced performance.


• Vibilagare: Kumho 3rd vs Hankook 6th (9 tyres) — Kumho better positioned.


• Autoklub ČR: Hankook placed better (9th) than Kumho (13th).

Kumho Ecsta HS52 — strengths & weaknesses
Across multiple tests the HS52 is praised for its wet performance, short wet and dry braking distances, balanced handling and excellent mileage/price value. ADAC notes strong wet-cornering and very good predicted tread life with low rolling resistance — attributes that make it cost-effective over time. Autobild and TyreReviews highlight convincing wet and dry performance and generally good comfort and price/value. Weaknesses recur around a slight aquaplaning vulnerability, heavier tyre weight, and only moderate ride comfort. Some tests flagged a delayed steering response and minor drawbacks in environmental/efficiency ratings. In short: Kumho is a balanced, value-focused touring summer tyre that leans slightly toward safer wet behaviour and longevity.

Hankook Ventus Prime 4 — strengths & weaknesses
The Ventus Prime 4 stands out for dynamic dry handling, short dry braking distances and low rolling resistance, earning praise for strong dry grip and efficiency (Autobild 2022/2024). Tests also show respectable mileage and a good price/performance ratio. However, multiple reports point to a weaker wet performance and some aquaplaning sensitivity, and Autobild 2024 flags only moderate tread life. Comfort is generally average. In essence: the Hankook is a strong performer for drivers who prioritise dry-road dynamics and fuel efficiency, but it is less convincing in heavy wet conditions.

Head-to-head verdict
Test results are close and scenario-dependent. If you prioritise overall wet safety, predicted longevity and a slightly higher aggregated score, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 is the better all-round choice. If dry handling, a more dynamic feel and lower rolling resistance matter most, the Hankook Ventus Prime 4 is the stronger candidate.

Final recommendation: Kumho wins narrowly on aggregated test scores and wet/long-term economy, while Hankook wins for drivers focused on dry performance and fuel-efficiency advantages. Check the linked manufacturer pages for detailed specs and availability: Kumho and Hankook.