18 Shops · 56,847+ Products

Comparison: Michelin Energy Saver + vs. Kumho Ecsta HS52 vs. Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2

Test Profile

Michelin
Energy Saver +
Kumho
Ecsta HS52
Goodyear
Efficient Grip Performance 2
Number of tests
4
10
18
Best position
#5
#2
#1
Average position
10.3
6.0
6.1
Latest test
2018
2026
2024
Available sizes
104
47

Wet

Wet
Michelin Energy Saver +
87%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
77%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
76%
Aquaplaning - cross
Michelin Energy Saver +
62%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
66%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
73%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
73%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
69%
Wet circle cornering
Michelin Energy Saver +
95%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
89%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
89%
Wet handling
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
79%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
75%

Costs

Costs
Michelin Energy Saver +
80%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
76%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
91%
Price/value
Michelin Energy Saver +
55%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
97%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
97%
Rolling resistance
Michelin Energy Saver +
79%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
70%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
84%
Mileage
Michelin Energy Saver +
94%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
79%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
100%

Comfort

Comfort
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
77%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
76%
Exterior noise
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
73%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
75%

Dry

Dry
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
87%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
75%
Dry handling
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
85%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
73%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison