Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
Across three shared, recent tests in 19-inch fitments (255/35R19 and 275/35R19), the pattern is consistent: Michelin tends to win on outright dry handling precision and lap-time capability, while Kumho repeatedly takes the meaningful safety and real-world categories in the wet-especially braking-and often does so with a refinement advantage. The result is less “premium wins everywhere” and more a genuine trade-off depending on whether you prioritise dry-track feel or everyday wet-road confidence and value.
Test Results
Independent comparison tire tests are the best source of data to get tire information from, and the good news is there have been three tests which compare both tires directly!
| Tire | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 | one | |
| Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S | one | |
| one draws in one tests | ||
The Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 and Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S have an equal number of test wins. However, tires are very complicated objects which means where one tire is better than the other can be more important in real world use.
Let's look at how the two tires compare across multiple tire test categories.
Key Strengths
- Consistently shorter wet braking across all shared tests (e.g., 22.64 m vs 24.64 m; 40.4 m vs 43.9 m)
- Strong real-world value: competitive performance while typically priced far below premium options (explicitly cheapest in Autobild)
- Good wet handling and controllability in objective tests (wins in wet handling and wet circle in Autobild and Tire Rack)
- Refinement-oriented performance: strong comfort/road feel scores in two tests (Autobild comfort 8; Tire Rack road score 7.83)
- Best-in-class dry handling precision across the dataset (wins dry handling in all three shared tests)
- Strong subjective dry dynamics and consistent lap performance in AutoView (noted steering linearity and repeatability; fastest lap 1:25.95)
- Better efficiency in measured rolling resistance (8.5 vs 9.65 kg/t in Autobild)
- Strong straight-line aquaplaning performance on the front axle (90.2 km/h in Autobild)
Dry Braking
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during two dry braking tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 stopped the vehicle in 1.55% less distance than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Dry Braking: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [s]
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was better during two dry handling [s] tests. On average the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was 1% faster around a lap than the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72.
Best In Dry Handling [s]: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was better during one dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was 1.67% faster around a lap than the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Dry Circle
Best In Dry Circle: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Dry Circle winner was calculated >>
Subj. Road Score
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one subj. road score tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 scored 9.58% more points than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Subj. Road Score: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Subj. Road Score winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during three wet braking tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 stopped the vehicle in 5% less distance than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Wet Braking: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [s]
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one wet handling [s] tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was 2.12% faster around a wet lap than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Wet Handling [s]: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was 1.11% faster around a wet lap than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Wet Handling
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one subj. wet handling tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 scored 7.75% more points than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Subj. Wet Handling: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Subj. Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one wet circle tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was 2.1% faster around a wet circle than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Wet Circle: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was better during one straight aqua tests. On average the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S floated at a 2.11% higher speed than the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72.
Best In Straight Aqua: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Subj. Comfort
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one subj. comfort tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 scored 3.4% more points than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Subj. Comfort: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Subj. Comfort winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was better during one noise tests. On average the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S measured 0.22% quieter than the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72.
Best In Noise: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was better during one rolling resistance tests. On average the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S had a 11.92% lower rolling resistance than the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 Driver Reviews
Drivers report the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 delivers very high grip and confidence in both wet and dry conditions, with strong steering response/feedback and a standout price-to-performance ratio versus premium competitors. Most reviews describe road noise as acceptable (sometimes slightly higher than rivals) and praise the tire's sporty, stiff sidewalls for precision. The main recurring downside is comfort/ride harshness from the stiff construction, and a minority of users report faster-than-expected tread wear compared with tires like the Michelin Pilot Sport 4S.
Based on 8 reviews with an average rating of 79%
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S Driver Reviews
Across 139 reviews, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S is most often described as a top-tier max-performance summer tire with outstanding dry grip, class-leading wet traction/braking, and high-speed confidence. Many drivers also report surprisingly good ride comfort (especially vs runflats) and strong tread life for the category. The most repeated drawbacks are high purchase price and a softer, sometimes vague turn-in/steering feel, with some also noting higher noise on coarse surfaces and that it is unsuitable for snow/ice.
Based on 160 reviews with an average rating of 85%
Conclusion
But as an all-rounder for public roads, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 comes out as the more compelling buy in this dataset-especially in wet safety metrics and price-to-performance. It won wet braking in all three shared tests, including a large gap in Tire Rack (40.4 m vs 43.9 m) and AutoView (22.64 m vs 24.64 m), and it beat Michelin on wet handling in the two tests that reported it (Autobild and Tire Rack). It also regularly looks like the more comfortable/refined option in practice (best Tire Rack “road score” 7.83 vs 7.08; Autobild comfort 8 vs 7.3), while Michelin is repeatedly flagged for being expensive relative to the results (notably ~€1020/set in Autobild) and for wet-performance shortcomings and balance quirks (front-to-rear aquaplaning imbalance).
Practical takeaway: choose the Michelin if you're chasing dry-limit precision and don't mind paying for that OE-calibrated feel; choose the Kumho if you want a modern, confidence-inspiring tire in the wet with strong refinement and far stronger value-without giving up much dry performance in the real world.
Key Differences
- Wet braking is the biggest real-world separator: Kumho wins 3/3 wet braking tests, with meaningful gaps (up to 3.5 m advantage in Tire Rack).
- Dry handling/lap-time capability favours Michelin in every shared test (3/3), though margins are generally small (e.g., 0.45% in Tire Rack).
- Kumho often feels more road-biased/refined in scoring: higher Tire Rack road score (7.83 vs 7.08) and better Autobild comfort (8 vs 7.3), while Michelin only narrowly leads comfort in AutoView (6.9 vs 6.7).
- Efficiency and running costs tilt Michelin: lower rolling resistance (8.5 vs 9.65 kg/t) suggests better fuel/EV range potential.
- Aquaplaning story is mixed: Michelin leads straight aquaplaning (90.2 vs 88.3 km/h) but is reported to have a notable front-to-rear imbalance, which can affect high-speed wet stability.
- Value proposition diverges sharply: Autobild highlights Michelin's very high price (~€1020/set) with middling wet results, while Kumho is repeatedly positioned as the budget-friendly tire with no major safety compromises.
Overall Winner: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
Based on the tire test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 has demonstrated better overall performance in this comparison. However, as you can see from the spider diagram above, each tire has its own strengths which should be considered in your final tire buying choice.Similar Comparisons
Looking for more tire comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tires:
Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 Top Comparisons
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
- No comments yet — be the first.