Falken ZE912 looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.

Head-to-head Updated

Falken ZE912 vs Kumho Ecsta PS31 — Compared

Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews. Based on 0 + 0 road tests and 200 + 259 owner reviews. How we score

Too close to call: ZE912 and Ecsta PS31 are level at 66.

Add your size for an exact match
/R

Both Amazon links then search this exact size.

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

Falken ZE912
Tire AFalken

ZE912

Summer

Tests – · none yet Owners 64 · 200 reviews

“Quote: Originally Posted by BobDogNdaHouse I just ordered some 912's (215/45) so I will give a review in a few weeks. I got them for $76 ea, but have seen them for $68, cant beat the price Thats a great price!!! What store did you see 215/45/17 for $68?”

Kumho Ecsta PS31
Tire BKumho

Ecsta PS31

Summer

Tests – · none yet Owners 63 · 259 reviews

Category by category

Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.

  1. 66

    Dry

    ZE912 +1
    65
    Why this score
    SourceZE912Ecsta PS31
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 67 (est.)≈ 66 (est.)
    Reviews found online6563

    ZE912: 60% × 66.6 (est.) + 40% × 65 = 66

    Ecsta PS31: 60% × 65.9 (est.) + 40% × 63.1 = 65

    No road tests of dry for ZE912. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).

    No road tests of dry for Ecsta PS31. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).

  2. 68

    Wet

    Level
    68
    Why this score
    SourceZE912Ecsta PS31
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 68 (est.)≈ 69 (est.)
    Reviews found online6768

    ZE912: 60% × 68.4 (est.) + 40% × 67.3 = 68

    Ecsta PS31: 60% × 68.8 (est.) + 40% × 68 = 68

    No road tests of wet for ZE912. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).

    No road tests of wet for Ecsta PS31. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).

  3. –

    Snow

    No comparison
    57
    Why this score
    SourceZE912Ecsta PS31
    Professional tests (TWG score)–≈ 63 (est.)
    Reviews found online–49

    Ecsta PS31: 60% × 62.9 (est.) + 40% × 48.8 = 57

    No road tests of snow for Ecsta PS31. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.33).

  4. 68

    Comfort

    ZE912 +1
    67
    Why this score
    SourceZE912Ecsta PS31
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 69 (est.)≈ 68 (est.)
    Reviews found online6665

    ZE912: 60% × 68.6 (est.) + 40% × 66.3 = 68

    Ecsta PS31: 60% × 68.4 (est.) + 40% × 65 = 67

    No road tests of comfort for ZE912 or Ecsta PS31. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.

  5. –

    Noise

    No comparison
    67
    Why this score
    SourceZE912Ecsta PS31
    Professional tests (TWG score)–≈ 67 (est.)
    Reviews found online–67

    Ecsta PS31: 60% × 67.3 (est.) + 40% × 67 = 67

    No road tests of noise for Ecsta PS31. The test half is the tested tires’ average (67): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.

  6. 63

    Treadwear

    Ecsta PS31 +2
    65
    Why this score
    SourceZE912Ecsta PS31
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 64 (est.)≈ 65 (est.)
    Reviews found online6065

    ZE912: 60% × 64 (est.) + 40% × 60.4 = 63

    Ecsta PS31: 60% × 65.3 (est.) + 40% × 64.7 = 65

    No road tests of treadwear for ZE912. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).

    No road tests of treadwear for Ecsta PS31. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).

  7. 63

    Handling (owners)

    Ecsta PS31 +4
    67
    Why this score
    SourceZE912Ecsta PS31
    Reviews found online6367
Scores at a glance
Falken ZE912 vs Kumho Ecsta PS31: scores by category (0–100)
CategoryFalken ZE912Kumho Ecsta PS31
Relative Score 66 66
Dry 66 65
Wet 68 68
Snow – 57
Comfort 68 67
Noise – 67
Treadwear 63 65
Handling (owners) 63 67

Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.

Weight the categories that matter to you

Wet grip starts at “Important”. Treadwear starts at “Neutral” here: road tests measured it for at most one of the two tires, so it rests on owner reviews. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.

Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Recomputed
Headline score

ZE912

Ecsta PS31

Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.

Pros, cons & observations

Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.

Tire A ZE912

Pros

  • Excellent value for money compared to premium brands
  • Low road noise and high ride comfort
  • Strong dry-weather grip and predictable handling

Cons

  • Inconsistent tread life, with many reports of premature wear
  • Soft sidewalls can lead to a 'squishy' feel or lack of steering precision
  • Wet-weather performance is frequently described as unpredictable or lacking at the limit
All owner themes in the ZE912 review

Tire B Ecsta PS31

Pros

  • Excellent price-to-performance ratio
  • High levels of ride comfort and low road noise
  • Strong dry traction for daily and spirited street driving

Cons

  • Soft sidewalls lead to vague steering response and 'squirm' during aggressive maneuvers
  • Inconsistent wet weather performance reported by some users, particularly in deep standing water
  • Tread life can be shorter than expected for some driving styles
All owner themes in the Ecsta PS31 review

What real owners are saying

From Reddit, forums and review threads. Not part of our score

Tire A

Falken ZE912

Mixed

Community consensus on the Falken Ziex ZE912 highlights it as an affordable, comfortable, and relatively quiet all-season tire with decent dry and predictable wet traction. However, users frequently criticize its rapid treadwear, poor winter/snow grip, tendency to develop road noise over time, and softer sidewalls compared to dedicated performance summer tires.

Top themes
#affordable pricing and value#quiet and comfortable ride#poor snow and winter performance#noise level over time#treadwear and longevity#sidewall stiffness and handling#wet road traction

Based on 50 community posts

Tire B

Kumho Ecsta PS31

We haven't collected enough community discussion about this tire yet.

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Falken ZE912 B · Kumho Ecsta PS31
CategorySummerSummer
Vehicle typePassenger Car / CrossoverPassenger Car / Crossover
Sizes available—21
Rim diameters—15″ – 18″
Tread depth—10/32″
UTQG—460 A A
Sidewall—Blackwall
Max pressure—51 psi

Which one should you actually buy?

Falken ZE912

Kumho Ecsta PS31

Too close to call: Falken ZE912 and Kumho Ecsta PS31 are within 2 points overall.

Tire A · Falken ZE912
Tire B · Kumho Ecsta PS31

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

ZE912 or Ecsta PS31?

Which is better in the wet, ZE912 or Ecsta PS31?

Neither, by our numbers: 68 vs 68 on the wet score, within 3 points.

Which grips better on dry roads, ZE912 or Ecsta PS31?

Neither, by our numbers: 66 vs 65 on the dry score, within 3 points.

Which is more comfortable, ZE912 or Ecsta PS31?

Neither, by our numbers: 68 vs 67 on the comfort score, within 3 points.

Which lasts longer, ZE912 or Ecsta PS31?

Neither, by our numbers: 63 vs 65 on the treadwear score, within 3 points.

How do we compare tires?

Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements), each result compared with every other tire in the same test and newer tests counting more. 40% comes from owner reviews found online, adjusted for how generously each site rates. Both use one scale: the average tested tire gets 70, the best 100. When a tire has only one of the two, the missing half is estimated from the other and the score stays closer to average; with no road test and fewer than five owner reviews it gets no score yet.

Handling is the exception: road tests measure it inside the dry and wet scores, so its own row comes from owner ratings only and starts as less important.

Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score. Full methodology