Bridgestone Turanza 6 vs Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
- TR Score
- 8.4/10
- Owners say
- 77% · 73
- TR Score
- 9.2/10
- Owners say
- 84% · 41
In the 2 independent tests that ran both tires, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 finished ahead 1 times and the Turanza 6 not once, with one level. The Turanza 6 had 21% lower rolling resistance; the Ecsta Sport PS72 stopped 3.8% shorter in the wet.
Data updated
Which should you buy?
Choose the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 if you want the stronger all-round summer performance-especially shorter wet braking and faster wet/dry handling with a sportier steering feel. Choose the Bridgestone Turanza 6 if efficiency (fuel/EV range), comfort, and aquaplaning margin in heavy rain matter more than ultimate wet/dry grip and pace.
Where the Turanza 6 is stronger
- Best-in-comparison (and described as best-in-test) rolling resistance/efficiency: ~20-21% lower rolling resistance than PS72 (0.632 vs 0.804 kg/t; 6.46 vs 8.14 kg/t)
- Stronger aquaplaning security in both tests (straight ~72.2 vs 71.4 km/h; curved 3.59 vs 3.32 m/s²)
- Better subjective comfort in both tests (6.2 vs 6.1; 6.6 vs 6.1) and a more touring-friendly demeanour
Where the Ecsta Sport PS72 is stronger
- Consistently higher dry grip and faster dry handling (74.2 vs 76.2 s; 73.15 vs 74.91 s) with stronger subjective dry scores (7.4 vs 6.3; 8.4 vs 8.0)
- Clear wet-performance advantage in braking and handling (wet braking 44.3 vs 46.1 m; 28.38 vs 29.47 m and wet handling 71.0 vs 75.2 s; 70.46 vs 72.65 s)
- Higher lateral wet grip/wet circle results in both tests (0.761 vs 0.709; 12.22 vs 12.74 s)
The bullet points are analysis of the shared tests and of owner reviews; the measured wins in each discipline are in the tables below. Where the two disagree, the figures are right.
Turanza 6 vs Ecsta Sport PS72 at a glance
| Category | Turanza 6 | Gap | Ecsta Sport PS72 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared tests won2 shared tests | 0 | 1 level | 1 |
| Dry6 measurements | 0 | The Ecsta Sport PS72 lapped the dry handling course 2.5% faster (2 tests) | 6 |
| Wet11 measurements | 4 | The Ecsta Sport PS72 stopped 3.8% shorter in the wet (2 tests) | 7 |
| Comfort4 measurements | 3 | 1 | |
| Value2 measurements | 2 | The Turanza 6 had 21% lower rolling resistance (2 tests) | 0 |
| Tire Reviews Scoreevery test and review we hold | 8.4/10 | The Ecsta Sport PS72 by 0.8 | 9.2/10 |
| Owner rating73 and 41 reviews | 77% | The Ecsta Sport PS72 by 7 points | 84% |
| Would buy againshare of owners | 63% | The Ecsta Sport PS72 by 19 points | 82% |
| Sizes madeEU label registrations | 148 | 71 sizes made in both | 86 |
Wins count every measurement the shared tests recorded for both tires; a tick marks the tire ahead on that line. Subjective driver scores count as wins but are never averaged, because each test uses its own scale.
Head to head in 2 tests in 2026
Each row is one published test in which both tires ran on the same car, in the same size, on the same day. The line is the whole field, winner on the left.
| Test | Turanza 6 | Field | Ecsta Sport PS72 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 Motor Summer Tire Test | P8 of 9 | P4 of 9 | |
| The BEST Summer Tires for 2026 Tested and Rated | P4 of 12 | P4 of 12 |
Performance profile
10 measurements from the 2 shared tests, each tire shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
Turanza 6
Ecsta Sport PS72
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
In each test the better of the two figures counts as 100% and the other as its share of it, so a 118 ft stop against 112 ft is 95%; each spoke averages the shared tests that recorded it. The scale stops at 90%: a point further in sits on the hub's edge, hollow. 3 measurements recorded in only one shared test are left off; every measurement is in the table further down.
Where each scores higher
Turanza 6
Ecsta Sport PS72
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
Category scores are percentiles among tires of the same season and class: 90 means this tire out-performs 90% of them, measured across every test we hold, not only the ones it appeared in.
Where owners rate each higher
Turanza 6
Not ahead in any category
Ecsta Sport PS72
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
Owners rate the Turanza 6 77% from 73 reviews and the Ecsta Sport PS72 84% from 41. Each spoke is one question owners answer out of 10; reviews are vetted by hand before publication.
Every measurement, side by side
Averages of the figures both tires posted in the same tests. The gap is the average of each test's own gap, so figures from different cars and years are never mixed. Open a discipline for its measurements, and a measurement for every test's figure.
| Measurement | Turanza 6 | Gap | Ecsta Sport PS72 | Wins | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 123 | 0.9% | 122 | 0-2 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 75.56 | 2.5% | 73.68 | 0-2 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| scored | 11.2% | scored | 0-2 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 124 | 3.8% | 119 | 0-2 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 73.93 | 4.3% | 70.73 | 0-2 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| scored | 12.2% | scored | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 1.6 | 7.3% | 1.7 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 12.74 | 4.1% | 12.22 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 44.9 | 1.1% | 44.4 | 2-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 11.8 | 8.1% | 10.9 | 2-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| scored | 4.9% | scored | 2-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 68.75 | = | 68.75 | 1-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 3.55 | 21% | 4.47 | 2-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Braking distances and lap times are better when lower; speeds, wear and grip figures when higher. A test's figures are its own: sizes, cars, surfaces and temperatures differ from one to the next, which is why the averages here are only ever of tests the two tires shared. "Scored" rows are subjective driver ratings: each test uses its own scale, so only the wins are counted.
Scores beyond the shared tests
On the Tire Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Turanza 6 scores 8.4 and the Ecsta Sport PS72 9.2 out of 10.
| Turanza 6 | Category | Ecsta Sport PS72 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 70 | Dry | 92 | ||
| 68 | Wet | 88 | ||
| 57 | Comfort | 35 | ||
| 85 | Value | 49 | ||
Category scores are percentiles among tires of the same season and class: 90 means this tire out-performs 90% of them, measured across every test we hold, not only the ones it appeared in.
What owners say
| Turanza 6 | Category | Ecsta Sport PS72 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8.5 | Dry Grip | 9 | ||
| 8.4 | Wet Grip | 8.8 | ||
| 7.4 | Road Feedback | 8.6 | ||
| 7.6 | Handling | 8.6 | ||
| 7.2 | Wear | 8.3 | ||
| 7.7 | Comfort | 7.7 | ||
Owners rate the Turanza 6 77% from 73 reviews and the Ecsta Sport PS72 84% from 41. Reviews are vetted by hand before publication; ownership is not verified.
Bridgestone Turanza 6
- 77%from 73 reviews
- 63%would buy again
- 616,298 milesdriven by reviewers
Owners generally rate the Bridgestone Turanza 6 as a quiet, very comfortable touring tire with strong wet and dry grip, reflected in a 74% average score and around seven in ten positive reviews. Comfort and refinement are the clear headline, with about half of owners mentioning low road noise and a smooth ride, while wet grip is widely praised by those who discuss it. The main drawback is a fairly common complaint about muted or vague steering feel (around one in five owners), and a similar share report issues with wear behavior, including uneven wear and shorter-than-expected life for some.
- Very comfortable ride quality
- Low road noise
- Strong wet grip and confidence in the rain
- Good dry grip
- Vague or heavy steering feel
- Soft sidewalls affecting precision and confidence
- Uneven wear across the tread
Summarised by AI from 65 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tire page.
All 73 Turanza 6 reviewsSuperb, very low noise, superb confort, mid handling. Over 20k miles and not even at 50%
Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
- 84%from 41 reviews
- 82%would buy again
- 160,312 milesdriven by reviewers
Owners rate the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 highly overall (average 81.6%), most often praising its strong value for money and genuinely impressive dry performance, with confident handling and high-speed stability. Wet grip also comes through as a notable strength for around a third of reviewers, helping it feel safe and predictable in poor weather. Comfort and road noise are generally seen as good for a performance tire, though a smaller but meaningful group find it noisier or less refined than expected. The main recurring downside is vibration or balancing/out-of-round issues mentioned by around one in six owners, with tread life only getting mixed, limited commentary so far.
- Excellent value for money versus premium rivals
- Strong dry grip with lots of confidence
- Sharp, capable dry handling through corners
- Stable and planted at motorway/high speeds
- Vibration/balancing or out-of-round issues at speed
- Can be noisy on some surfaces or at higher speeds
- Tread life concerns from a minority (seems to wear quickly for some)
Summarised by AI from 38 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tire page.
All 41 Ecsta Sport PS72 reviewsBought them to replace Hankook ventus prime 4 (Touring type of tires), did a bunch of research before buying, they were really cheap ! So i bought them, you notice the difference in handling and cornering immediately, yes they are UHP and they deliver on that, not that the hankook's were inferior but the Kumhos are a different experience during fast cornering. I drive mainly on mountain passes, they stick like glue on the tarmac they hold well on the wet, haven't drove hard yet on really heavy rain but they seem to do great, no aquaplaning as of now. Sidewalls are not hard as a rock but they aren't soft, they don't deform during cornering, riding on them is nice and comfortable. The only negative as a first impression is this, went from a 68db tire to a 71db on the highway noise is significant worse with those Kumho, you can feel and hear every imperfection of the road, if you care about the noise buy the version with the foam inside I think they call it K version or something.
Sizes, EU label and lineage
From the EU label registrations for each tire: 148 sizes of the Turanza 6 and 86 of the Ecsta Sport PS72, 71 of them made in both.
| Category | Turanza 6 | Ecsta Sport PS72 |
|---|---|---|
| Season | Summer | Summer |
| Sizes made | 148 sizes, 15 to 22 inch | 86 sizes, 17 to 21 inch |
| Made in both | 71 sizes 205/45 R17205/50 R17215/40 R17215/45 R17215/50 R17215/55 R17225/45 R17225/50 R17225/55 R17235/45 R17235/55 R17235/65 R17and 59 more | |
| EU label wet grip | A63%B37% | A95%B5% |
| EU label rolling resistance | B47%A44%C8% | C77%B10%A8%D5% |
| EU label noise | 66-73 dB B60%A40% | 70-74 dB B100% |
| Replaced | Bridgestone Turanza T005 (2016) | Kumho Ecsta PS91 |
| Awards | Highly Recommended: Best Tires for Small & Mid-Size SUVs (DriverReviews, 2026/27) Recommended: Best Tires for Large Family Cars (DriverReviews, 2026/27) Winner: Best Tires for Family Cars (DriverReviews, 2026/27) Winner: Best Tires for Large SUVs (DriverReviews, 2026/27) Winner: Summer Tire of the Year (WhatTire, 2025) Winner: Best Tires for Family Cars (DriverReviews, 2024/25) | Winner: Summer Value Performer (17in and above) (WhatTire, 2026/27) |
Label grades are shown as the share of registered sizes carrying each grade, so "B (88%), C (12%)" means most sizes are B. Grades vary by size; check the label for yours.
Reading the results
Written from the test results and owner reviews above. It is analysis, not a measurement: where it and the tables disagree, the tables are right.
This is an interesting, slightly “category-crossed” matchup: the Bridgestone Turanza 6 is a premium-touring summer tire built around refinement and efficiency, while the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 is a max-performance summer tire aimed at higher grip and sharper dynamics. In other words, you're comparing a tire optimized for low running costs and comfort against one designed to feel sporty and deliver lap-time style performance in everyday sizes like 225/45 R17.
Across the two shared 2026 tests, the pattern is consistent: the Kumho repeatedly outperforms the Bridgestone on outright dry and wet grip (braking and handling), while the Bridgestone answers back with clearly stronger aquaplaning security, better subjective comfort, and a very large rolling-resistance advantage. The choice comes down to whether your priority is “grip and response” or “efficiency, ease and hydroplaning margin.”
Conclusion
On objective grip and dynamic performance, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 is the clear winner across both tests. It beats the Turanza 6 in dry braking (37.1 m vs 37.4-37.45 m), dry handling (74.2 s vs 76.2 s; 73.15 s vs 74.91 s), wet braking (44.3 m vs 46.1 m; 28.38 m vs 29.47 m) and wet handling (71.0 s vs 75.2 s; 70.46 s vs 72.65 s). Subjective scores back that up too, with the Kumho rated higher for driver confidence and “bite” in both dry and wet. If you drive briskly, value steering clarity, or simply want the shorter wet stops and faster wet lap times, the PS72 is the more convincing tire.
The Bridgestone Turanza 6, however, is meaningfully stronger in the areas that matter for relaxed, high-mileage use: it dominates rolling resistance by roughly ~20-21% in both tests (0.632 vs 0.804 kg/t; 6.46 vs 8.14 kg/t), and it's consistently better in aquaplaning (straight: ~72.2 vs 71.4 km/h; curved: 3.59 vs 3.32 m/s²). It also edges comfort and is generally described as stable and predictable-just not very “grippy,” especially in the wet where testers noted a lack of bite and some hydroplaning moments.
Practical takeaway: pick the Kumho if you want performance-first wet/dry grip and a sportier feel; pick the Bridgestone if your priorities are fuel/EV range, refinement, and extra hydroplaning margin in heavy rain-accepting that it gives up noticeable wet-handling pace and overall grip for that efficiency.
Turanza 6 vs Ecsta Sport PS72: your questions
Is the Bridgestone Turanza 6 or the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 the better tire?
In the 2 independent tests that ran both tires, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 finished ahead 1 times and the Turanza 6 not once, with one level. On the Tire Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Turanza 6 scores 8.4 and the Ecsta Sport PS72 9.2 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the Turanza 6 or the Ecsta Sport PS72?
The Ecsta Sport PS72 led 7 of the 11 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 3.8% shorter in the wet across 2 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The Ecsta Sport PS72 led 6 of the 6 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it lapped the dry handling course 2.5% faster across 2 tests.
Which lasts longer and costs less to run?
The Turanza 6 had 21% lower rolling resistance (2 tests). Owners rate wear 7.2/10 for the Turanza 6 and 8.3/10 for the Ecsta Sport PS72.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 7.7/10 for the Turanza 6 and 7.7/10 for the Ecsta Sport PS72.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the Turanza 6 77% from 73 reviews and the Ecsta Sport PS72 84% from 41. 63% of Turanza 6 owners would buy it again, against 82% for the Ecsta Sport PS72.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The Turanza 6 is made in 148 sizes (15 to 22 inch) and the Ecsta Sport PS72 in 86 (17 to 21 inch). 71 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the Turanza 6 is graded A for wet grip and B for rolling resistance in most sizes; the Ecsta Sport PS72 A and C.
More comparisons with these tires
vs 
Bridgestone Turanza 6 vs Continental PremiumContact 7
0-14 in 14 shared tests
vs 
Bridgestone Turanza 6 vs Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
5-2 in 7 shared tests
vs 
Bridgestone Turanza 6 vs Michelin Primacy 5
3-4 in 7 shared tests
vs
Hankook Ventus Evo vs Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
6-2 in 8 shared tests
vs 
Bridgestone Turanza 6 vs Michelin Primacy 4+
1-4 in 5 shared tests
vs 
Bridgestone Turanza 6 vs Hankook Ventus Prime 4
6-1 in 7 shared tests
vs
Continental SportContact 7 vs Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
1-2 in 3 shared tests
vs 
Bridgestone Turanza 6 vs Uniroyal RainSport 5
4-0 in 4 shared tests
Run either of these?
Your review is the part of this page no test can supply: how the tire wore, how it aged, what it was like in the rain in year three. It takes about five minutes.
Where this data comes from
Finishing positions and measurements are transcribed from each published test. A test only counts here when both tires ran in it, so every figure was recorded on the same car, size and day as the one it is compared to.
About the TR Score
The Tire Reviews Score rates each tire out of 10 from every independent test result and vetted owner review we hold, so two tires can be compared even before a test has run them together.
Who does the testing
Every test published as a Tire Reviews test is run by Jonathan Benson, who has been testing tires independently since 2007.
Discussion