Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 vs Nokian Powerproof 2

Across the shared tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 is the more convincing “all-weather summer” performer, especially in the wet. In Autobild's 245/45 R19 test it decisively outperformed the Nokian in key wet metrics: wet braking (42.4 m vs 44.0 m), wet handling (82.6 vs 81.7 km/h), and aquaplaning resistance (91.0 vs 89.7 km/h straight aquaplaning; 3.43 vs 3.10 m/sec² curved). That wet advantage is reinforced by the large subjective wet-handling gap (8.7 vs 7.3 points). It also repeats a wet-braking win in the 50-tire braking-only test (27.1 m vs 28.1 m). Put simply: when conditions are slippery, the Kumho gives you more margin.

The Nokian Powerproof 2's case is strongest if your priorities are lower noise, better efficiency, and respectable durability. It's quieter in Autobild (71.7 dB vs 74.1 dB), rolls easier (7.48 vs 8.15 kg/t), and shows slightly better wear/mileage (50,080 vs 48,230 km) with lower measured abrasion. However, its performance profile is spikier: ACE highlighted excellent wet handling/traction for its class, but also the earliest straight-line aquaplaning onset in that test (80.1 km/h) and the only explicit criticism for rear-axle support in a lane-change stability assessment-practical drawbacks if you drive briskly in heavy rain or encounter standing water.

Value also tilts the decision. The Kumho's Autobild cost-per-distance metric is meaningfully better (12.44 vs 15.18 price/1000), and it still matches the Nokian on dry braking in the shared data (both at 34.4 m in the 245/45 R19 tests). The takeaway: choose Kumho for wet safety headroom and price/performance; choose Nokian if you want a quieter, more efficient tire and can accept more conditional wet/aquaplaning confidence depending on circumstances and size.

Similar Comparisons

Looking for more tire comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tires:

Footnote

This page has been developed using tire industry testing best practices. This means we are only comparing tests which have had both tires in the same test.

Why is this important? Tire testing is heavily affected by things like surface grip levels and surface temperature, which means you can only compare values from the same day. During a tire test external condition changes are calculated into the overall results, but it is not possible to calculate this between tire tests performed on different days or at different locations.

As a result you will see other tests on Tire Reviews which feature both the %s and %s, but as they weren't conducted on the same day, the results are not comparable.

Lots of other websites do this sort of tire comparison, Tire Reviews doesn't.

Discussion

1. No comments yet — be the first.