Segment
1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Upper-middle2. Lassa Driveways Lowcost
Comparison: Kumho Ecsta HS52 vs. Lassa Driveways
Table of contents:
| # | Kumho Ecsta HS52
| Lassa Driveways
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R14 - R18 | ||
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
If you are in the market for summer tyres, two models you might want to consider are the Kumho Ecsta HS52 and the Lassa Driveways. In this review, we compare their strengths, weaknesses, and performances in various tyre tests.
The Kumho Ecsta HS52 is a touring summer tyre, which replaced the previous model, Kumho Ecsta HS51. It scores a solid 78% in our rating, demonstrating good all-round performance. In both Autobild and the ADAC tests, it consistently ranked well, assuming the 3rd and 8th positions out of 51 and 50 tyres tested, respectively. This tyre particularly stood out in dry braking, dry handling, wet braking, and price/value, showing its reliability across varied conditions. There were, however, some shortcomings in environmental balance and efficiency. Kumho addressed these concerns and the tyres now have more balanced performance.
On the other hand, the Lassa Driveways did not fare as well in comparison. Unfortunately, we do not have a rating for it yet. This tyre performed less well in the Autobild and ADAC tests, landing towards the bottom of the table (the 47th and 46th positions). Moreover, while it had positive points, such as being economical and having relatively little wear, there were some glaring cons. These included a very unbalanced performance with pronounced weaknesses on dry surfaces, dangerous weaknesses on wet surfaces (resulting in a downgrade), low mileage, and sustainability issues. The manufacturer, Lassa, has not yet issued a newer model to address these problems.
To summarise, data and tests indicate the Kumho Ecsta HS52 is overall the stronger recommended choice for a summer tyre over the Lassa Driveways. This is based on its consistent high performance in tests, well-balanced features, and its value for money. We keep hoping the shortcomings in environmental balance and efficiency will be addressed in a newer tyre model, which could boost its rating further.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 5.67
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Good
Worst rating in test
1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Good
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Outside noise accoring to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 35,4 | 25,8 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 | 35,4 | 26,1 | |||||
| Lassa Driveways | 39,5 | 34,7 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Enviromental impact | Driving safety | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1,3 | 1,8 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Good | 2,7 | 2,3 | |||||
| Lassa Driveways Rating: Poor | 3,1 | ||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 35,7 | 27,5 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 | 35,7 | 28,6 | |||||
| Lassa Driveways | 39 | 34,9 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
