18 Shops · 56,847+ Products

Comparator | Contact Us

Comparison: Nokian Line SUV vs. Kumho Ecsta HS52 vs. BFGoodrich Advantage

Nokian Line SUV

Nokian

Line SUV

VS

Kumho Ecsta HS52

Kumho

Ecsta HS52

BFGoodrich Advantage

BFGoodrich

Advantage

Also compare with

PremiumContact 7

Pilot Sport 5

Test Profile

Nokian

Line SUV

Kumho

Ecsta HS52

BFGoodrich

Advantage

Number of tests

5

10

14

Best position

#2

#2

#8

Average position

4.2

6.0

13.4

Latest test

2017

2026

2026

Available sizes

33

104

153

Wet

Wet

Nokian Line SUV

85%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

77%

BFGoodrich Advantage

61%

Wet braking

Nokian Line SUV

77%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

80%

BFGoodrich Advantage

77%

Wet circle cornering

Nokian Line SUV

78%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

89%

BFGoodrich Advantage

69%

Wet handling

Nokian Line SUV

84%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

79%

BFGoodrich Advantage

57%

Aquaplaning - cross

Nokian Line SUV

81%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

66%

BFGoodrich Advantage

53%

Aquaplaning - longitudal

Nokian Line SUV

82%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

73%

BFGoodrich Advantage

61%

Dry

Dry

Nokian Line SUV

82%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

87%

BFGoodrich Advantage

72%

Dry braking

Nokian Line SUV

78%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

89%

BFGoodrich Advantage

76%

Dry handling

Nokian Line SUV

87%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

85%

BFGoodrich Advantage

80%

Costs

Costs

Nokian Line SUV

71%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

76%

BFGoodrich Advantage

68%

Mileage

Nokian Line SUV

60%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

79%

BFGoodrich Advantage

63%

Rolling resistance

Nokian Line SUV

78%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

70%

BFGoodrich Advantage

66%

Comfort

Comfort

Nokian Line SUV

72%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

77%

BFGoodrich Advantage

79%

Exterior noise

Nokian Line SUV

70%

Kumho Ecsta HS52

73%

BFGoodrich Advantage

68%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison