Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun vs Kumho Ecsta HS52

The Kumho Ecsta HS52 emerges as the more rounded winner for most buyers: it typically stops shorter in the dry (6 of 7 dry braking wins), matches or edges wet braking in several tests, and delivers markedly better wear and running costs (often 10-50% longer projected mileage; consistently lower price/1000 km). If you value confident braking, predictable dynamics, and best-in-test value, Kumho is the safer bet.

The Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun is the rain specialist. It repeatedly tops aquaplaning (straight and curved), frequently wins wet handling metrics, and rides more comfortably. If you drive in regions with heavy rainfall, deep standing water, or prioritize comfort and subjective wet feel, Falken is compelling-just be mindful of shorter tread life and, in some tests, higher rolling resistance.

Bottom line: choose Kumho for all-round performance and superior cost-per-mile; choose Falken for maximum wet safety margins and comfort during stormy commutes.

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.