Comparison: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs. Hankook ION Evo vs. Kumho Ecsta PS71

Premium

Michelin

Pilot Sport 4 S

VS

ION Evo

Ecsta PS71

8.3

R16 – R22

Also compare with

SportContact 7

Ventus Evo

PremiumContact 7

Test Profile

Pilot Sport 4 S

ION Evo

Ecsta PS71

Number of tests

10

1

15

Best position

#1

#2

Average position

2.1

1.0

9.0

Latest test

2025

Available sizes

195

64

225

Wet

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

75%

Hankook ION Evo

89%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

79%

Wet braking

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

88%

Hankook ION Evo

97%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

79%

Wet handling

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

84%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

79%

Aquaplaning - longitudal

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

87%

Hankook ION Evo

77%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

90%

Wet circle cornering

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

88%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

72%

Aquaplaning - cross

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

85%

Hankook ION Evo

87%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

87%

Dry

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

83%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

72%

Dry braking

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

95%

Hankook ION Evo

91%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

76%

Dry handling

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

96%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

81%

Comfort

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

75%

Hankook ION Evo

72%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

67%

Exterior noise

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

70%

Hankook ION Evo

66%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

62%

Comfort

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

81%

Hankook ION Evo

78%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

72%

Costs

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

81%

Hankook ION Evo

71%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

71%

Rolling resistance

Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S

81%

Hankook ION Evo

69%

Kumho Ecsta PS71

73%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Comparison: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs. Hankook ION Evo vs. Kumho Ecsta PS71

Pilot Sport 4 S

ION Evo

Ecsta PS71

Test Profile

Wet

Dry

Comfort

Costs

Dimensions and prices

Add to comparison