Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun vs Kumho Ecsta HS52
- TR Score
- 8.4/10
- Owners say
- 80% · 119
- TR Score
- 9.0/10
- Owners say
- 82% · 30
In the 7 independent tests that ran both tires, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 finished ahead 4 times and the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun 3 times. The ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun held 11.2% more grip in curved aquaplaning; the Ecsta HS52 lasted 18.3% longer in the wear tests.
Data updated
Which should you buy?
Pick Kumho Ecsta HS52 for the best all-round performance, shortest stopping distances, and class-leading cost-per-mile-ideal for mixed driving and higher annual mileage. Choose Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun if your priority is maximum rain security (aquaplaning resistance) and comfort in frequent heavy-wet conditions.
Where the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun is stronger
- Outstanding aquaplaning resistance (often 10-14% advantage in curved aquaplaning)
- Strong wet handling/braking balance with secure limit behavior
- Higher ride comfort and subjective wet feel
Where the Ecsta HS52 is stronger
- Consistently short dry braking (wins 6 of 7) and very competent wet braking
- Excellent wear and value (lower price/1000 km; significantly longer projected mileage)
- Low external noise in several tests and solid overall balance
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.
ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun vs Ecsta HS52 at a glance
| Category | ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun | Gap | Ecsta HS52 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared tests won7 shared tests | 3 | 4 | |
| Dry11 measurements | 3 | The Ecsta HS52 stopped 1.9% shorter in the dry (7 tests) | 8 |
| Wet26 measurements | 20 | The ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun held 11.2% more grip in curved aquaplaning (5 tests) | 6 |
| Comfort7 measurements | 4 | 3 | |
| Value11 measurements | 2 | The Ecsta HS52 lasted 18.3% longer in the wear tests (4 tests) | 8 |
| Tire Reviews Scoreevery test and review we hold | 8.4/10 | The Ecsta HS52 by 0.6 | 9.0/10 |
| Owner rating119 and 30 reviews | 80% | The Ecsta HS52 by 2 points | 82% |
| Would buy againshare of owners | 78% | The ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun by 3 points | 75% |
| Pricein the 5 tests that listed prices | +10.5% | The ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was dearer in 5 of 5 | Cheaper |
| Sizes madeEU label registrations | 86 | 49 sizes made in both | 54 |
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 7 tests, 2022 to 2024
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 | ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun | Field | Ecsta HS52 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 AutoBild Summer Tire Test | P7 of 20 | P4 of 20 | |
| 2024 ADAC Summer Tire Test | P10 of 16 | P3 of 16 | |
| 2024 Summer Tire Market Overview | P7 of 55 | P2 of 55 | |
| 2023 ADAC Summer Tire Test | P6 of 50 | P8 of 50 | |
| Tire Reviews Best Summer Touring Tires | P6 of 13 | P8 of 13 | |
| 2022 Auto Bild Summer Tire Test | P5 of 21 | P6 of 21 | |
| 2022 Summer Tire Market Overview | P5 of 50 | P3 of 50 |
Performance profile
13 measurements from the 7 shared tests, each tire shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
Ecsta HS52
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 95%: a point further in sits on the hub's edge, hollow. 7 measurements recorded in only one shared test are left off; every measurement is in the table further down.
Where each scores higher
ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
Ecsta HS52
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
ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
Ecsta HS52
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
Owners rate the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun 80% from 119 reviews and the Ecsta HS52 82% from 30. 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 | ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun | Gap | Ecsta HS52 | Wins | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 121 | 1.9% | 119 | 1-6 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 52.04 | 0.9% | 51.58 | 0-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 65.7 | 0.4% | 65.5 | 2-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | 5.6% | scored | 0-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 116 | 0.3% | 115 | 5-2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 118 | 1.7% | 120 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 86.58 | 0.5% | 87 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 46 | 0.2% | 46.1 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | 5.6% | scored | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 14.2 | 2.5% | 13.9 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 11.65 | 0.3% | 11.68 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 50.7 | 2.5% | 49.4 | 4-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 12.9 | 11.2% | 11.6 | 5-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | 11.1% | scored | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 71.4 | 0.1 dB | 71.32 | 2-3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 19.8 | 1.1% | 20.1 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 23,031 | 18.3% | 27,867 | 0-4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 8.77 | 3.1% | 8.48 | 1-2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5.95 | 0.8% | 5.9 | 0-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 73.85 | 9.5% | 67.15 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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 ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun scores 8.4 and the Ecsta HS52 9 out of 10.
| ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun | Category | Ecsta HS52 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 70 | Dry | 89 | ||
| 79 | Wet | 85 | ||
| 62 | Comfort | 21 | ||
| 42 | Value | 65 | ||
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
| ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun | Category | Ecsta HS52 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8.6 | Dry Grip | 9.1 | ||
| 8.2 | Wet Grip | 8.1 | ||
| 8.1 | Road Feedback | 8.6 | ||
| 8 | Handling | 8.3 | ||
| 7.7 | Wear | 7.8 | ||
| 7.9 | Comfort | 7.1 | ||
Owners rate the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun 80% from 119 reviews and the Ecsta HS52 82% from 30. Reviews are vetted by hand before publication; ownership is not verified.
Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
- 80%from 119 reviews
- 78%would buy again
- 1,000,122 milesdriven by reviewers
Drivers generally describe the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun as an excellent value summer touring tire with strong wet-weather safety (including aquaplaning resistance) and confident dry grip, often punching above its price class. A very common highlight is low cabin noise and an overall smooth, secure feel, with many users also reporting good wear life over high mileage. The most recurring drawbacks are higher rolling resistance (fuel consumption increase for some cars) and a softer/less precise steering feel that can disappoint more performance-focused drivers, with a subset also finding the ride firmer on rough roads.
- Strong wet grip and reassuring aquaplaning resistance
- Good dry grip and braking
- Low road noise / quiet cabin
- Good value for money
- Higher rolling resistance leading to increased fuel consumption for some drivers
- Soft sidewalls or less precise steering/feedback (not ideal for hard sporty driving)
- Firm/harsh ride on rough roads for some vehicles/setups
Summarised by AI from 107 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tire page.
All 119 ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun reviewsA quiet tire, very predictable/forgiving at the limit, especially in the rain, with a soft sidewall.These miles were covered with spirited driving on winding roads.
Kumho Ecsta HS52
- 82%from 30 reviews
- 75%would buy again
- 302,698 milesdriven by reviewers
Most owners rate the Kumho Ecsta HS52 highly, praising its strong dry grip and confident, direct dry handling, and many also feel it represents excellent value for money. Noise levels are often described as low and wet grip is generally considered reassuring, though a small minority report it can feel less secure in the wet at the limit. Longevity feedback is mixed: while many see good mileage, around one in seven owners mention uneven or abnormal wear and a similar share report faster-than-expected wear.
- Strong dry grip with plenty of confidence
- Direct, predictable dry handling
- Excellent value for money for the performance
- Generally low road noise for a touring summer tire
- Reports of uneven or abnormal wear patterns
- Mixed tread life with some owners seeing quicker wear
- Can feel a bit firm over bumps on poorer surfaces
Summarised by AI from 23 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tire page.
All 30 Ecsta HS52 reviewsIt's a nice a comfortable and quiet tire for road trips, and higway use. But I think lacks the peak grip both in the dry and in the wet. It loses grip quite suddenly. But if your driving far from the edge, its a really nice tire.
Sizes, EU label and lineage
From the EU label registrations for each tire: 86 sizes of the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun and 54 of the Ecsta HS52, 49 of them made in both.
| Category | ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun | Ecsta HS52 |
|---|---|---|
| Season | Summer | Summer |
| Sizes made | 86 sizes, 14 to 19 inch | 54 sizes, 14 to 20 inch |
| Made in both | 49 sizes 185/60 R14185/55 R15185/60 R15185/65 R15195/50 R15195/55 R15195/65 R15205/60 R15205/65 R15185/50 R16185/55 R16195/45 R16and 37 more | |
| EU label wet grip | A100% | A80%B20% |
| EU label rolling resistance | D50%C47%B2%A1% | C58%D16%A14%B12% |
| EU label noise | 67-72 dB A74%B26% | 68-72 dB B97%A3% |
| On the market since | 2017 | - |
| Replaced | Falken ZIEX ZE914 EcoRun (2012) | Kumho Ecsta HS51 |
| Replaced by | Falken ZIEX ZE320 | - |
| Price in the shared tests | The ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was the dearer tire in 5 of the 5 tests that listed prices, by 10.5% on average. Each test priced the tires in its own market at the time; only the gap is comparable. | |
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 comparison pits two well-known premium-touring summer tires-the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun and Kumho Ecsta HS52-against each other across seven independent tests from 2022-2024. Both target everyday drivers who want secure wet-weather ability and predictable dry manners without the price tag of flagship UHP models.
Across the dataset, Kumho consistently scores higher overall, driven by strong dry and wet braking and standout longevity/value. Falken counters with excellent aquaplaning resistance, competitive wet handling, and higher comfort. The result is a clear split: Kumho excels at stopping power and cost-per-mile, while Falken offers extra security in heavy rain and a more refined ride.
Conclusion
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.
ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun vs Ecsta HS52: your questions
Is the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun or the Kumho Ecsta HS52 the better tire?
In the 7 independent tests that ran both tires, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 finished ahead 4 times and the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun 3 times. On the Tire Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun scores 8.4 and the Ecsta HS52 9 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun or the Ecsta HS52?
The ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun led 20 of the 26 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it held 11.2% more grip in curved aquaplaning across 5 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The Ecsta HS52 led 8 of the 11 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 1.9% shorter in the dry across 7 tests.
Which lasts longer and costs less to run?
The Ecsta HS52 lasted 18.3% longer in the wear tests (4 tests), had 3.1% lower rolling resistance (3 tests) and used 0.8% less fuel (2 tests). Owners rate wear 7.7/10 for the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun and 7.8/10 for the Ecsta HS52.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 7.9/10 for the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun and 7.1/10 for the Ecsta HS52.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun 80% from 119 reviews and the Ecsta HS52 82% from 30. 78% of ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun owners would buy it again, against 75% for the Ecsta HS52.
Which is more expensive?
In the 5 tests that listed prices, the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was the dearer tire in 5 of them, by 10.5% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun is made in 86 sizes (14 to 19 inch) and the Ecsta HS52 in 54 (14 to 20 inch). 49 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun is graded A for wet grip and D for rolling resistance in most sizes; the Ecsta HS52 A and C.
More comparisons with these tires
vs
Hankook Ventus Prime 4 vs Kumho Ecsta HS52
3-5 in 8 shared tests
vs
Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun vs Hankook Ventus Prime 4
3-5 in 9 shared tests
vs 
Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun vs Toyo Proxes Comfort
8-2 in 12 shared tests
vs 
Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun vs Nexen N Fera Primus
6-0 in 6 shared tests
vs
Continental PremiumContact 7 vs Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
7-0 in 7 shared tests
vs 
Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun vs Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
3-13 in 16 shared tests
vs
Bridgestone Turanza 6 vs Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
3-2 in 5 shared tests
vs 
Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun vs Pirelli CINTURATO P7
2-2 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