Segment
1. Vredestein ULTRAC Premium2. Hankook Ventus Prime 4 Premium3. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Upper-middle4. Maxxis Premitra HP5 Lowcost
Comparison: Kumho Ecsta HS52 vs. Vredestein ULTRAC vs. Hankook Ventus Prime 4 vs. Maxxis Premitra HP5
The Kumho Ecsta HS52 and the Vredestein ULTRAC are two notable summer tyres that deliver different performances across their respective fields. Each of these tyres have their strengths and offer an all-round performance under various conditions.
A successor to the Kumho Ecsta HS51, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 secures an impressive 81% rating from our test. This is in part due to its excellent performance on both wet and dry surfaces, dependable mileage and wet circle cornering. With a focus on dry handling, braking, and price-value ratio, this tyre excels in the Autobild and ADAC tests. However, its Aquaplaning feature may need further improvements for an even better performance.
Flipping the coin, the Vredestein ULTRAC scores strikingly well on dry and wet surfaces, showing minimal chances of Aquaplaning. It shows its prowess in the Autoklub ČR test, where it ranks 7th out of 19 tyres tested. Plus points to this Vredestein's model are secured by its excellent wet handling, short dry braking distances and powerful Aquaplaning resistance. However, an increased rolling resistance and external noise along with a lesser mileage compared to the Kumho Ecsta HS52 mark it down slightly in our test ratings, garnering a 42% overall.
Though the Vredestein ULTRAC shows a strong suit in wet conditions, the Kumho Ecsta HS51 pulls ahead with a better overall performance. Plus, its superior mileage and price-value ratio make the Kumho's model a clear winner in the overall performance, retaining its worthiness among touring tyres.
To sum up, both the Kumho Ecsta HS52 and Vredestein ULTRAC deliver excellent dry and wet handling respectively. They prove to be durable and are efficient for long drives. If mileage and price-value ratio are a priority, then the Kumho Ecsta HS52 proves to be a safer bet. Meanwhile, the Vredestein ULTRAC's excellent wet handling and Aquaplaning resistance make it a strong competitor. Choosing between these tyres would mostly depend on the user's preference and driving conditions.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 5.673. Vredestein ULTRAC 7.25
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Hankook Ventus Prime 4 Exemplary2. Vredestein ULTRAC Highly recommended3. Maxxis Premitra HP5 Very good4. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Good
Worst rating in test
1. Kumho Ecsta HS52 Good2. Hankook Ventus Prime 4 Recommended3. Maxxis Premitra HP5 Conditionally recommended4. Vredestein ULTRAC Sufficient
Wet
(Overall rating)Aquaplaning - cross
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Wet braking
Wet handling
Wet circle cornering
Wet braking according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
Comfort
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Rolling resistance
Mileage
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
Dry handling
Add to comparison
Mutual Tests Available
These tyres were tested together in 7 test(s). Click to view detailed head-to-head results.
7
Mutual tests
| Name | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Good | |||||||
| Vredestein ULTRAC Rating: Conditionally recommended | |||||||
| Hankook Ventus Prime 4 Rating: Good | |||||||
| Maxxis Premitra HP5 Rating: Satisfactory | |||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 35,4 | 25,8 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 | 35,4 | 26,1 | |||||
| Vredestein ULTRAC | 36,1 | 26,6 | |||||
| Hankook Ventus Prime 4 | 35,9 | 27,7 | |||||
| Maxxis Premitra HP5 | 36,2 | 28,4 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Enviromental impact | Driving safety | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1,6 | 1,7 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Good | 2,8 | 2,1 | |||||
| Vredestein ULTRAC Rating: Sufficient | 3,83 | 2,3 | |||||
| Hankook Ventus Prime 4 Rating: Satisfactory | 2,1 | 2,9 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Points total | Wet | Dry | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 104,7 | 106 | 103,4 | ||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 | 96,9 | 94,3 | 99,5 | ||||
| Vredestein Ultrac | 101,3 | 103,3 | 99,2 | ||||
| Hankook Ventus Prime 4 | 101 | 100,6 | 101,4 | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1 | ||||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Recommended | 1 | ||||||
| Vredestein Ultrac Rating: Recommended | 1 | ||||||
| Hankook Ventus Prime 4 Rating: Recommended | 1 | ||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Running costs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1 | 2+ | 1+ | ||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS52 Rating: Good | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||||
| Vredestein Ultrac Rating: Satisfactory | 1- | 2 | 3 | ||||
| Hankook Ventus Prime 4 Rating: Exemplary | 1- | 2+ | 2+ | ||||
| Maxxis Premitra HP5 Rating: Satisfactory | 2+ | 2- | 3 | ||||
| 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 | |||||
| Vredestein Ultrac | 36,1 | 28,2 | |||||
| Hankook Ventus Prime 4 | 35,8 | 27,8 | |||||
| Maxxis Premitra HP5 | 37,3 | 28,9 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
