Menu

Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72

The Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 is a max-performance summer tire that delivers near-premium levels of grip and confidence for a mid-range price. Real-world drivers and independent tests align on strong wet and dry traction, reassuring braking, and stable, predictable handling at speed. Where it's less convincing is in standing-water security, with aquaplaning resistance repeatedly trailing key rivals, and some reports of refinement issues. Overall, it's a standout value choice if you prioritise grip and steering confidence over ultimate wet-water evacuation and polished ride quality.

9.3
Tire Reviews Score Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews
High Confidence View Breakdown
Dry Grip
91%
Wet Grip
88%
Road Feedback
85%
Handling
87%
Wear
85%
Comfort
75%
Buy again
75%
25 Reviews
84% Average
69,075 miles driven
7 Tests (avg: 5th)
Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72

Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72

Summer Mid-Range
BETA
9.3 / 10
Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews · High Confidence · Updated 23 Feb 2026

The Tire Reviews Score is the most comprehensive tire scoring system available. It aggregates professional test data from multiple independent publications, user reviews, and consistency analysis using Bayesian statistical methods, weighted normalisation, and recency-adjusted scoring to produce a single, reliable performance rating.

Learn more about our methodology
Value
90.3
0.42x / 2 tests
Comfort
80
0.32x / 3 tests
Wet
77.5
2x / 9 tests
Dry
76.3
1.8x / 5 tests

Cross-category scores are derived metrics that combine data from multiple test disciplines to evaluate real-world performance characteristics.

Handling
88.8
4 tests
Braking
77.2
6 tests
Score Components
Professional Tests
Weight: 80%
Tests: 7
Publications: 6
Period: 2025 - 2026
User Reviews
Weight: 15%
Reviews: 25
Avg Rating: 83.6%
Min Required: 5
Consistency
Weight: 5%
Score Std Dev: 0.4
History Points: 10
Methodology & Configuration
Scoring Process
  1. Collect Test Data: Gather results from professional tire tests across multiple publications. Minimum 1 test(s) required.
  2. Normalize Positions: Convert test positions to percentile scores using exponential weighting (factor: 1.2).
  3. Apply Recency Weighting: More recent tests are weighted higher with a decay rate of 0.95.
  4. Incorporate User Reviews: Factor in user review data (minimum 5 reviews). Weight: 15%.
  5. Bayesian Smoothing: Apply Bayesian prior (score: 7, weight: 1.5) to prevent extreme scores with limited data.
  6. Calculate Final Score: Combine all components using normalization factor of 1.1. Max score with limited data: 9.5.
Component Weights
Test Data
80%
User Reviews
15%
Consistency
5%
All Configuration Parameters
ParameterValueDescription
safety_weight 0.7 Weight multiplier for safety-related metrics
performance_weight 0.55 Weight multiplier for performance metrics
comfort_weight 0.4 Weight multiplier for comfort metrics
value_weight 0.45 Weight multiplier for value-for-money metrics
user_reviews_weight 0.15 How much user reviews contribute to the final score
test_data_weight 0.8 How much professional test data contributes to the final score
consistency_weight 0.05 How much score consistency contributes to the final score
recency_decay_rate 0.95 Rate at which older test results lose influence (higher = slower decay)
min_test_count 1 Minimum number of professional tests required
min_review_count 5 Minimum number of user reviews required
score_version 1.9 Current version of the scoring algorithm
score_normalization_factor 1.1 Factor used to normalize raw scores to the 0-10 scale
confidence_factor_weight 0.2 How much data confidence affects the final score
position_penalty_weight 0.2 Penalty applied for poor test positions
gap_penalty_threshold 12 Score gap (%) that triggers additional penalties
min_metrics_count 2 Minimum number of test metrics needed per test
limited_data_threshold 2 Number of tests below which data is considered limited
single_test_penalty 0.75 Score multiplier when only one test is available
critical_metric_penalty 0.7 Penalty for poor performance on critical safety metrics
critical_metric_threshold 70 Score below which a critical metric penalty applies
position_exponential_factor 1.2 Exponent used to amplify position-based scoring
position_exponential_threshold 0.9 Position percentile below which exponential scoring applies
gap_multiplier_critical 3 Multiplier for critical gap penalties
max_category_weight 2 Maximum weight any single category can have
max_score_limited_data 9.5 Score cap when data is limited
bayesian_prior_weight 1.5 Weight of the Bayesian prior in smoothing
bayesian_prior_score 7 Prior score used for Bayesian smoothing
evidence_test_multiplier 1.9 Multiplier for test evidence in confidence calculation
evidence_metric_divisor 3 Divisor for metric count in evidence calculation
evidence_review_divisor 10 Divisor for review count in evidence calculation
combined_penalty_floor 0.2
Data Sources
TestPublicationDateSizePositionMetrics
2026 Summer SUV Tire Test Auto Bild Allrad 2026 255/45 R19 6/9 13 metrics
2026 Autobild Summer Tire Test Auto Bild 2026 245/45 R19 6/20 15 metrics
The BEST Summer Tires for 2026 Tested and Rated Tire Reviews 2026 225/45 R17 4/13 12 metrics
2026 Summer Braking Super Tire Test - How do 52 Tires Perform in Wet and Dry Braking? Auto Bild 2026 245/45 R19 4/50 2 metrics
2026 ACE Summer Tire Test ACE 2026 225/40 R18 7/10 0 metrics
2025 Die Reifentester UHP Summer Tire Test Die Reifentester 2025 225/40 R18 1/8 8 metrics
2025 Auto Express Summer Tire Test Auto Express 2025 225/40 R18 5/9 9 metrics

Videos

The BEST Summer Tires for 2026 - 12 Tires Tested and Rated!

The BEST Summer Tires for 2026 - 12 Tires Tested and Rated!

Awards
7
Tests
5th
Average
1st
Best
7th
Worst
Latest Tire Test Results
A strong blend of dry and wet grip with sporty, predictable steering and a high-confidence feel.
Aquaplaning resistance was near the bottom and comfort scores were in the lower part of the group.
The Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 finished joint 4th overall and earned a Recommended award. It was consistently near the front for objective grip with top-four placements across wet and dry braking and handling, and it backed that up with one of the top subjective dry handling scores and a strong subjective wet score. My notes repeatedly mention steering and predictability, which fits the balanced results. Its clear weaknesses were aquaplaning performance, where it was low in both straight and curved tests, and comfort, where it sat towards the back on subjective scoring.
6th/20
The Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 also finishes sixth and performs particularly well in wet conditions, with good braking and handling results. Dry performance is competitive across the board. The purchase price is among the lowest in the finalist group, making it a strong value option. Rolling noise is slightly above average, which is the main comfort-related limitation.
2026 ACE Summer Tire Test
225/40 R18 • 2026
7th/10
Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 took seventh on 131 points with a "recommended" rating and at €69 represented the second-cheapest tire in the test. Its dry safety score of 49 placed it in the lower half — below the top group of Pirelli, Continental, Bridgestone, and Michelin but ahead of Linglong and Nexen. Its wet safety score of 62 matched Falken, with a reasonable wet braking result of 23 out of 30 but unremarkable wet handling at 15 out of 20. Its economy score of 20 tied with Michelin at the joint lowest. A tire that avoids the dramatic strengths and weaknesses seen elsewhere in the field, sitting in the mid-pack across almost every category — and offering that consistency at a price point well below the premium brands.
Size Fuel Wet Noise
17 inch
225/45R17 91 Y C A 71
View All Sizes and EU Label Scores for the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 >>

Questions and Answers for the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72

Ask a question
March 14, 2025

Hello, no tests or reviews of this tires yet?

The PS72 is a very new tire. One publication has tested it on youtube, diereifentester tested it with Kumho.
October 20, 2025

Hi, this new ultra high performance summer tire from Kumho has shown very good results (performing on the same level as conti SC7. Unfortunately PS72 Ecsta sport hasn't got many reviews yet and not to mention the nokian powerproof 1 will also be manufacutred by Kumho Tire Europe GmbH, would you recommend choosing either of these two tires as a staggered setup on a BMW F31 rear-wheel drive ?

I'm sure the Kumho would be a good match for the BMW, it has enough reviews and tests to see a positive trend.
Ask a question

We will never publish or share your email address

captcha

To verify you are human please type the word you see in the box below.

Review Summary

Based on 22 user reviews

Drivers generally report the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 as a highly grippy, confidence-inspiring tire with strong wet and dry performance, good braking and stable, predictable handling at speed. Many also highlight excellent value versus premium rivals, often describing performance close to top-tier tires for much less money. The main recurring complaint is highway-speed vibration (often linked to balancing or possible out-of-round tires), with a smaller set noting it can be a bit noisier or firmer than some competitors.

Strengths
  • Strong wet and dry grip
  • Good braking performance
  • Stable
  • Predictable handling and high-speed confidence
  • Excellent value for money versus premium brands
  • Generally comfortable/controlled ride
Areas for Improvement
  • Vibration/balancing issues at highway speeds (possible out-of-round tires)
  • Slightly higher noise or firmer/harsh ride compared with some competitors

Top 3 Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 Reviews

Given 87% while driving a Audi A4 2.0 TDI 140 SLine (245/40 R18) on a combination of roads for 10,000 average miles
Bought these tires dur to the very good reviews of ps71. I do not have a sporty car, but the dry grip and braking it’s excellent. Never felt the tires struggling for grip.

They are not loud, but wouldn't they are necessarily quiet. You can hear them a bit depending on the road surface and speed.


Didn’t drive them too much in the rain, but seem to hold pretty well in wet conditions.


Mounted them in march this year and after 10-15k km I don’t see any major wear, but I would have to abstain on this one until I get them properly measured.

All in all, very good value tires and they looks preety good on my car
June 22, 2025
Given 85% while driving a Mazda 3 Series (225/40 R18) on mostly town for 500 spirited miles
At first I need to say, I bought them as brand new for price 65€ per tire, so it's stands as value price tire. And that is their problem, it's so cheap, why? This tires behave better in compare to CSC5, so I dont understand why they're so cheap.

This tire is much more quiet (while label say 72dB), much more comfy on harsh roads (in here in Czechia), petrol consumption is lover.

Now question about handling. It's new tire, so it takes time to sit, but first impressions are great. Grip is comparable to CSC5 and other premium tires. Gives not much response as my previous tire Potenza RE002 that I had for few hundreds kms. But still, handling is amazing. On curved roads, in city streets and roundabouts they're really great and fun to drive. I'm much more confident and can cut same corners and roundabouts in higher speeds than with previous tires. And quietly without squeak.
This summer isnt much rainy, so I have not much reference for wet conditions, but for that minimum that I drove in wet, it's ok. Grips firmly, turns easily and ride without wheel spin or warning light on dashboard.
I also tried higher speeds in motorway, it's calm and quiet, holding straight line easily and without vibrations (from tires).

Thats my first impressions. Even it's low cost tire, it's really great and premium tire brand beater.
August 16, 2025
Tesla 2024 Model 3 RWD (235/40 R19) on a combination of roads for 3,100 average miles
Update after 5000 km / 3100 miles.
Everything is great with the tires except i have annoying vibrations between 100-120 km/h.
Just got them re-balanced but it did not solve the problem. My other rims and winter tires run smooth so its not the car.
Maybe also got some Kumho out-of-round issue here. Sorry to say it but this will make me hesitate to buy them again.
July 16, 2025

How would you rate the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72?

Click a star to start your review

Latest Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 Reviews

Initial Impressions Review
Given 70% while driving a BMW 525i (245/40 R18) on for 1,000 miles
I want to start off saying I unfortunately totaled my car driving a bit too fast and so that's why the experience with this tire is such short lived. But I did get to scrub it in and test out it's capabilities.

One can argue that tire screeching noise ≠ limit of grip but still compared to the previous tires I had on which was Continental Max Contact 6 this tire would screech much louder and earlier than the Contis would. And after a lot of deliberation, my conclusion is that the Conti MC6 had a bigger envelope as a whole in terms of wet grip, dry grip, comfort, everything except for feedback.

Here is where this tire really left a strong impression, and that is it's feedback. This tire has that chunky outer shoulder block design like many UUHP tires (imagine like the PS4s) and perhaps that's the reason why + tread block tuning amongst others that made the steering felt absolutely sensational. It was much more direct and when you've loaded your car through weight shift this tire talks to me front and rear axle WAY MORE than the Conti MC6 did.

Within the "soft" limit, meaning you are orchestrating the weight of your car, you're dancing and not yanking the car around much. This tire can handle the forces fine. I have done 206km/h in wet conditions on a left bend and the car felt fine, granted I was keeping in mind to dance with the car. And that's the thing with this tire, unlike the Conti or the Michelin PS5 (have experienced doing 10/10ths on it). The Kumho PS72 lacks that extra inch of grip.

To conclude, in my opinion based on my short lived experience. The Kumho PS72 is not in the same envelope of grip as the top tier tires, but it is priced at such a low price that the value proposition makes it a strong argument to go for this tire.
March 28, 2026
Initial Impressions Review
Given 87% while driving a Audi A4 1.8T Quattro (225/45 R17) on for 2,000 miles
Fitted on A4 B6 Quattro with 280 bhp.
The tires were purchased in mid-February and manufactured in Korea by the end of 2025. They were not deformed, etc., when I received them.
There were no issues during fitting or balancing, which is not always the case, for example with Falken FK520s.
The tires are relatively stiff and have a good compound, which results in confident handling in corners and at higher speeds, including above motorway speeds.
In the wet, they also behave predictably—whether driving straight, turning, or braking.
I would definitely recommend them. In my opinion, they have no competition at this price point, which is also reflected in tests and other users’ reviews.
I previously had Goodyear Eagle Asymmetric 3, and in my opinion, the PS72's are very comparable.
March 18, 2026
Initial Impressions Review
Given 92% while driving a Ford Focus (235/40 R18) on for 600 miles
Bought a pair of these to replace a pair of Michelin PS4 on the rear of my Focus 1.5T. I have PS5 on the front.

I chose these as they have strong reviews and there was a £60 difference to the PS5 (£89 each at time of purchase)

First thing I noticed is they are alot quieter on the motorway than the PS4's have ever been. The rear grip is predictable and stable in wet, and no quarms at
March 2, 2026
Initial Impressions Review
Given 95% while driving a Volkswagen Passat 2.0TDI (235/45 R18) on for 1,000 miles
These tires replaced a set of Michelin Pilot Sport 5's.
Early indications show that the Kumho's offer more grip, better feel, are quieter and generally give more confidence over the PS5's.
I rarely review products but these Kumho's have genuinely surprised me. Great product at a fantastic price-point, well done Kumho!
February 19, 2026
Initial Impressions Review
Given 77% while driving a Volvo V60 T6 AWD (235/40 R19) on for 1,000 miles
i fitted the Kumho last october, to replace the factory fitted Michelin Primacy 4 on my Volvo V60 T6. I only drove a few weeks, prior to fitting winter tires for the season, so these are my initial impressions. More details next Spring.
My first feeling is the tire is very direct and with a high level of grip. stable at (very) high speed, and with high levels of grip, also on cold damp roads. The tire is a bit noisy, and despite being the same size as the OE, there is a higher margin of error on the tacho speed- real GPS speed (which I assume is linked to different tread depth of the tire).
Overall an honestly good tire, especially at is significantly cheaper to the other options I had considered, namely the SportContact7 and the Potenza Sport.
February 16, 2026
Initial Impressions Review
Given 91% while driving a Mazda 3 Skyactiv 2018 (215/45 R18) on for 10,000 miles
The tires perform really well, with excellent wet grip. They feel very safe, and they're also very good in the dry, though braking distance seems a bit long. They're also quite comfortable. The only problem is that above 170 km/h I experience a slight vibration in the steering, which I didn't have with the stock Bridgestone Turanza.
February 8, 2026
Initial Impressions Review
Given 79% while driving a BMW M140i (245/35 R18) on for 5,000 miles
Similar to Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
February 3, 2026
Initial Impressions Review
Given 63% while driving a Porsche 718 GTS (275/35 R20) on for 800 miles
First I should preface this by the fact that these are fitted to a dedicated sports car ( 718S Cayman ) that gets driven in a spirited fashion on deserted local roads at appropriate times.
I usually get pretty shocking mileage as a result of this and do well to get over 2000 miles out of rears in dry conditions.
These were fitted about 6 weeks ago and the paltry 800 miles have been mostly wet or damp.
I’m down to 4 mm across the tread which is a bit of a shock. I should add pressures and alignment are spot on.
They definitely have a lot of traction in wet or dry. However the wear rate is the price you pay here. I think if these had been fitted in summer they would probably be finished.
February 3, 2026
Initial Impressions Review
Given 91% while driving a BMW E92 335i (225/45 R17) on for 10,000 miles
I moved to these tires after paying over £230 per tire for Bridgestones on my BMW.

The car produces a lot of power and torque, and these tires cope with it well. They provide steady grip and remain stable at speed.

Most of my driving is on motorways, where they feel comfortable and controlled on long journeys. When driving on country roads, the tires stay predictable through bends and uneven surfaces.

Based on my use so far, they offer solid performance and good value compared with more expensive options.
January 9, 2026
Given 92% while driving a Alfa Romeo 156 SW 1.9 JTD (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 2,000 average miles
Perfect tire for decent money. Highly recommend.
December 16, 2025
Given 73% while driving a Skoda Octavia vRS (235/40 R19) on a combination of roads for 0 average miles
Tires are very noisy and causes my car to vibrate as if the wheels need balancing again which they don’t, definitely would not recommend
December 15, 2025
Given 86% while driving a MINI Cooper S (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 1,000 spirited miles
Honestly I like them. So much cheaper than Michelin Pilot Sports to the point of not justifying it anymore. If they were the same price would go Michelin Sport, but they are definitely not 40% worse!
September 26, 2025
Rate the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72