Tests – · none yet Owners 41 · 10 reviews
Kumho Ecsta 712 looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.
Head-to-head
Updated
Kumho Ecsta 712 vs Michelin Energy — 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 10 + 42 owner reviews. How we score
Energy is ahead, 60–48
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.
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
48
Dry
Energy +755Why this score
Source Ecsta 712 Energy Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 55 (est.) ≈ 60 (est.) Reviews found online 37 48 Ecsta 712: 60% × 55.4 (est.) + 40% × 37.1 = 48
Energy: 60% × 60 (est.) + 40% × 48.4 = 55
No road tests of dry for Ecsta 712. 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 Energy. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).
-
44
Wet
Energy +1761Why this score
Source Ecsta 712 Energy Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 50 (est.) ≈ 63 (est.) Reviews found online 35 57 Ecsta 712: 60% × 50.2 (est.) + 40% × 34.8 = 44
Energy: 60% × 62.9 (est.) + 40% × 57.4 = 61
No road tests of wet for Ecsta 712. 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 Energy. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).
-
51
Comfort
Energy +1465Why this score
Source Ecsta 712 Energy Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 63 (est.) ≈ 68 (est.) Reviews found online 33 60 Ecsta 712: 60% × 62.9 (est.) + 40% × 33.2 = 51
Energy: 60% × 67.6 (est.) + 40% × 60.2 = 65
No road tests of comfort for Ecsta 712 or Energy. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
59
Treadwear
Energy +867Why this score
Source Ecsta 712 Energy Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 62 (est.) ≈ 66 (est.) Reviews found online 54 67 Ecsta 712: 60% × 62.1 (est.) + 40% × 54.1 = 59
Energy: 60% × 66.1 (est.) + 40% × 67.3 = 67
No road tests of treadwear for Ecsta 712. 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 Energy. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).
-
34
Handling (owners)
Energy +1751Why this score
Source Ecsta 712 Energy Reviews found online 34 51
Scores at a glance
| Category | Kumho Ecsta 712 | Michelin Energy |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 48 | 60 |
| Dry | 48 | 55 |
| Wet | 44 | 61 |
| Comfort | 51 | 65 |
| Treadwear | 59 | 67 |
| Handling (owners) | 34 | 51 |
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
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Recomputed
Headline score
48
/ 100
Ecsta 712
60
/ 100
Energy
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A Ecsta 712
Pros
- Highly competitive price point
- Better-than-average tread life compared to some premium performance tires
- Acceptable dry weather handling for casual driving
Cons
- Dangerous and unpredictable wet weather traction
- High levels of road noise and harsh ride quality
- Poor steering feedback and tendency for understeer/oversteer
Tire B Energy
Pros
- Exceptional tread life and durability
- Noticeable improvements in fuel economy
- Low road noise and comfortable ride quality
Cons
- Lack of steering feedback and road feel
- Inconsistent or poor grip in wet conditions
- High price point relative to competitors
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Kumho Ecsta 712 | B · Michelin Energy |
|---|---|---|
| Category | All Season | Summer |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
Which one should you actually buy?
48
/ 100
Kumho Ecsta 712
60
/ 100
Michelin Energy
Winner: Michelin Energy — better wet, handling and comfort. It leads or ties in every category we score. Kumho Ecsta 712 rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 10 reviews), so read this result as provisional.
Pick tire B
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Michelin Energy scores 61 vs 44 on wet.
Pick tire B
You enjoy sharp, responsive handling
Michelin Energy scores 51 vs 34 on handling.
Pick tire B
You want the most comfortable ride
Michelin Energy scores 65 vs 51 on comfort.
Pick tire B
You want the longest tread life
Michelin Energy scores 67 vs 59 on treadwear.
Tire A · Kumho Ecsta 712
Tire B · Michelin Energy
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Ecsta 712 or Energy?
Which is better in the wet, Ecsta 712 or Energy?
Michelin Energy, 61 vs 44 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Ecsta 712 or Energy?
Michelin Energy, 55 vs 48 on our dry score.
Which is more comfortable, Ecsta 712 or Energy?
Michelin Energy, 65 vs 51 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, Ecsta 712 or Energy?
Michelin Energy, 67 vs 59 on our treadwear score.
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