18 Shops · 56,847+ Products
THETYRELAB.COM

Comparison: Michelin Energy Saver + vs. Firestone Roadhawk vs. Kumho Ecsta PS71

Michelin Energy Saver +Premium
MichelinMichelin

Energy Saver +

R13 – R
Firestone RoadhawkUpper-middle
FirestoneFirestone

Roadhawk

5.7
R15 – R21
Kumho Ecsta PS71Upper-middle
KumhoKumho

Ecsta PS71

8.3
R16 – R22
Also compare with
SportContact 7 Ventus Evo PremiumContact 7

Test Profile

Michelin
Energy Saver +
Firestone
Roadhawk
Kumho
Ecsta PS71
Number of tests
4
21
15
Best position
#5
#2
#2
Average position
10.3
11.9
9.0
Latest test
2018
2024
2025
Available sizes
—
164
225

Wet

Wet
Michelin Energy Saver +
87%
Firestone Roadhawk
71%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
79%
Aquaplaning - cross
Michelin Energy Saver +
62%
Firestone Roadhawk
72%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
87%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
Firestone Roadhawk
79%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
90%
Wet circle cornering
Michelin Energy Saver +
95%
Firestone Roadhawk
78%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
72%
Wet handling
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
Firestone Roadhawk
74%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
79%

Costs

Costs
Michelin Energy Saver +
80%
Firestone Roadhawk
70%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
71%
Mileage
Michelin Energy Saver +
94%
Firestone Roadhawk
64%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
65%
Price/value
Michelin Energy Saver +
55%
Firestone Roadhawk
61%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
63%
Rolling resistance
Michelin Energy Saver +
79%
Firestone Roadhawk
74%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
73%

Comfort

Comfort
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
Firestone Roadhawk
71%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
67%
Exterior noise
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
Firestone Roadhawk
62%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
62%

Dry

Dry
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
Firestone Roadhawk
85%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
72%
Dry handling
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
Firestone Roadhawk
88%
Kumho Ecsta PS71
81%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison