Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews (comfort 40/60). Based on 7 + 1 road tests and 2,400 + 11 owner reviews. How we score
Ecsta HS52 is ahead, 79–68
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests 83 · 7 tests Owners 75 · 2,400 reviews
Best test result: #1 of 21 in 2022 Auto Bild Summer Tyre Test (dry braking)
“I have kuhmo ecsta hs52's on my renault megane during spring and summer and they are really good. No complaints at all. My milage did go up a little bit but that's it”
Tests 74 · 1 test Owners 64 · 11 reviews
Best test result: #1 of 6 in 2023 APAC Tyre Test (dry handling)
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
| Source | Ecsta HS52 | UltraContact UC7 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 7 / 1 tests | 86 | 82 |
| Reviews found online | 80 | 65 |
Ecsta HS52: 60% × 86.4 + 40% × 80.1 = 84
UltraContact UC7: 60% × 81.6 + 40% × 64.9 = 75
| Source | Ecsta HS52 | UltraContact UC7 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 7 / 1 tests | 89 | 69 |
| Reviews found online | 78 | 62 |
Ecsta HS52: 60% × 89.2 + 40% × 77.6 = 85
UltraContact UC7: 60% × 68.6 + 40% × 62.1 = 66
| Source | Ecsta HS52 | UltraContact UC7 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests | ≈ 68 (est.) | 70 |
| Reviews found online | 66 | 59 |
Ecsta HS52: 40% × 68.2 (est.) + 60% × 65.9 = 67
UltraContact UC7: 40% × 69.8 + 60% × 59.1 = 63
No road tests of comfort for Ecsta HS52. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
| Source | Ecsta HS52 | UltraContact UC7 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 3 / 1 tests | 64 | 68 |
| Reviews found online | ≈ 66 (est.) | ≈ 66 (est.) |
Ecsta HS52: 60% × 63.9 + 40% × 66.3 (est.) = 65
UltraContact UC7: 60% × 68.3 + 40% × 66.3 (est.) = 68
No owner ratings of noise for Ecsta HS52 or UltraContact UC7. The owner half is the owners’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests, so the tests say nothing about how owners would rate it.
| Source | Ecsta HS52 | UltraContact UC7 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 5 / – tests | 80 | ≈ 66 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 70 | 66 |
Ecsta HS52: 60% × 79.7 + 40% × 69.6 = 76
UltraContact UC7: 60% × 66.5 (est.) + 40% × 66.4 = 66
No road tests of treadwear for UltraContact UC7. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
| Source | Ecsta HS52 | UltraContact UC7 |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews found online | 77 | 63 |
| Source | Ecsta HS52 | UltraContact UC7 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 5 / 1 tests | 43 | 71 |
| Category | Kumho Ecsta HS52 | Continental UltraContact UC7 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 79 | 68 |
| Dry | 84 | 75 |
| Wet | 85 | 66 |
| Comfort | 67 | 63 |
| Noise | 65 | 68 |
| Treadwear | 76 | 66 |
| Handling (owners) | 77 | 63 |
| Efficiency | 43 | 71 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
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.
Ecsta HS52
UltraContact UC7
Per discipline: the average % of the best tire over every test both tires were in, and how many of those tests each one won. “Different tests” rows compare results from separate tests.
| Discipline | Category | Ecsta HS52 | UltraContact UC7 | Δ | Head-to-head |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Braking | Dry | 95% #9/16 · 2026 ADAC Summer Tyre Test | 100% #2/6 · 2023 APAC Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Dry Handling | Dry | 100% #3/20 · 2024 AutoBild Summer Tyre Test | 100% #1/6 · 2023 APAC Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Straight Aquaplaning | Wet | 97% #5/16 · 2026 ADAC Summer Tyre Test | 100% #1/6 · 2023 APAC Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Wet Braking | Wet | 97% #3/16 · 2026 ADAC Summer Tyre Test | 95% #4/6 · 2023 APAC Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Wet Handling | Wet | 99% #2/20 · 2024 AutoBild Summer Tyre Test | 94% #4/6 · 2023 APAC Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Noise | Noise | 96% #16/16 · 2024 ADAC Summer Tyre Test | 99% #5/6 · 2023 APAC Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Rolling Resistance | Efficiency | 88% #16/20 · 2024 AutoBild Summer Tyre Test | 94% #4/6 · 2023 APAC Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Also published by the testers (not in the score) | |||||
| Overall Ranking | Overall | #9/16 2026 ADAC Summer Tyre Test | #3/6 2023 APAC Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
From Reddit, forums and review threads. Not part of our score
The Kumho Ecsta HS52 receives a polarized mix of reviews from the community, praised by many for its rigid sidewalls, strong dry grip, sharp steering responsiveness, and great value compared to premium alternatives. However, some users report disappointing wet weather performance, potential issues with aquaplaning resistance, and inconsistent test results across different sizes. Overall, it is viewed as a solid mid-range option, though experiences with wet traction and longevity vary significantly among drivers.
“Mini review of the Kumho Ecsta HS52 I was running some Hankook's on my GT before and the tire wall not stiff enough. Now I've mounted these Kumho Ecsta HS52's and I highly recommend them: The tire wall is nicely rigid and they grip great in the dry, took quite some intent to make them loose traction. Additionally, I've accidentally ran over a pretty big sharp looking rock at decent speed that aimed right in a tread groove (thinnest part) and the thing shrugged it off no problem. And all of this for a damn good price too! So if anyone's looking for good tires, now you know.”
“What’s up with these tyres? Kumho ectsa hs52 date code 3923, tyres are (UK) legal regards tread but I can’t imagine this damage is normal. Both front tyres have this, looks like the tread is tearing apart in multiple places. I did not fit these tyres but it was mot’d 3 months ago and has done 2k miles since. I’ve owned the car 11 months but only noticed this very recently. I am getting them replaced on Monday with little use before then but I’m curious how this has happened. Is it just a shit brand? Wear is even across the face so I don’t think it would be the alignment or anything to do with the car and the damage is random across the contact patch. It’s a Peugeot 508 2l diesel so quite a bit of weight on the nose. Fitting Bridgestone Turanza 6. Rear tyres are good, but a different brand (horizon horace 2122 date)”
“I have kuhmo ecsta hs52's on my renault megane during spring and summer and they are really good. No complaints at all. My milage did go up a little bit but that's it”
Based on 17 community posts
We haven't collected enough community discussion about this tire yet.
| Attribute | A · Kumho Ecsta HS52 | B · Continental UltraContact UC7 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | — |
| Sizes available | 53 | — |
| Rim diameters | 14″ – 20″ | — |
Kumho Ecsta HS52
Continental UltraContact UC7
Winner: Kumho Ecsta HS52 — better wet, handling and treadwear. Pick the Continental UltraContact UC7 if efficiency and noise matter most to you. Continental UltraContact UC7 rests on little evidence so far (1 test, 11 reviews), so read this result as provisional.
Continental UltraContact UC7 scores 71 vs 43 on efficiency.
Kumho Ecsta HS52 scores 85 vs 66 on wet.
Kumho Ecsta HS52 scores 77 vs 63 on handling.
Kumho Ecsta HS52 scores 76 vs 66 on treadwear.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Kumho Ecsta HS52, 85 vs 66 on our wet score.
Kumho Ecsta HS52, 84 vs 75 on our dry score.
Continental UltraContact UC7, 68 vs 65 on our noise score.
Kumho Ecsta HS52, 67 vs 63 on our comfort score.
Kumho Ecsta HS52, 76 vs 66 on our treadwear score.
Continental UltraContact UC7, 71 vs 43 on our efficiency score.
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
