tirewheelguide
Head-to-head Updated

Michelin Energy Saver+ vs Kumho Ecsta HS51 — Compared

Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews (comfort 40/60). Based on 0 + 6 road tests and 66 + 1,668 owner reviews. How we score

Too close to call: Energy Saver+ 72, Ecsta HS51 73.

Check price on Amazon · Energy Saver+ Check price on Amazon · Ecsta HS51
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.

Kumho Ecsta HS51
Tire BKumho

Ecsta HS51

Summer

± 5

Tests 75 · 6 tests Owners 68 · 1,668 reviews

Best test result: #1 of 20 in 2021 Auto Bild 16 Inch Summer Tyre Test (wet handling)

Category by category

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

  1. 71

    Dry

    Ecsta HS51 +3
    74
    Why this score
    SourceEnergy Saver+Ecsta HS51
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 4 tests≈ 70 (est.)77
    Reviews found online7369

    Energy Saver+: 60% × 70 (est.) + 40% × 72.9 = 71

    Ecsta HS51: 60% × 76.6 + 40% × 69 = 74

    No road tests of dry for Energy Saver+. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).

  2. 71

    Wet

    Ecsta HS51 +5
    76
    Why this score
    SourceEnergy Saver+Ecsta HS51
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 4 tests≈ 71 (est.)79
    Reviews found online7172

    Energy Saver+: 60% × 70.9 (est.) + 40% × 71 = 71

    Ecsta HS51: 60% × 79.4 + 40% × 71.7 = 76

    No road tests of wet for Energy Saver+. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).

  3. 72

    Comfort

    Energy Saver+ +4
    68
    Why this score
    SourceEnergy Saver+Ecsta HS51
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 70 (est.)≈ 68 (est.)
    Reviews found online7467

    Energy Saver+: 40% × 69.8 (est.) + 60% × 73.7 = 72

    Ecsta HS51: 40% × 68.4 (est.) + 60% × 67.1 = 68

    No road tests of comfort for Energy Saver+. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).

    No road tests of comfort for Ecsta HS51. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).

  4. –

    Noise

    No comparison
    66
    Why this score
    SourceEnergy Saver+Ecsta HS51
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 2 tests–65
    Reviews found online–≈ 66 (est.)

    Ecsta HS51: 60% × 65.3 + 40% × 66.3 (est.) = 66

    No owner ratings of noise for Ecsta HS51. 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.

  5. 77

    Treadwear

    Energy Saver+ +7
    70
    Why this score
    SourceEnergy Saver+Ecsta HS51
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 4 tests≈ 73 (est.)73
    Reviews found online8465

    Energy Saver+: 60% × 72.8 (est.) + 40% × 83.9 = 77

    Ecsta HS51: 60% × 73.3 + 40% × 64.9 = 70

    No road tests of treadwear for Energy Saver+. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).

  6. 72

    Handling (owners)

    Energy Saver+ +4
    68
    Why this score
    SourceEnergy Saver+Ecsta HS51
    Reviews found online7268
  7. –

    Efficiency

    No comparison
    57
    Why this score
    SourceEnergy Saver+Ecsta HS51
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 2 tests–57
Scores at a glance
CategoryMichelin Energy Saver+Kumho Ecsta HS51
Relative Score 72 73
Dry 71 74
Wet 71 76
Comfort 72 68
Noise – 66
Treadwear 77 70
Handling (owners) 72 68
Efficiency – 57

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
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
Not important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

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

Recomputed
Headline score
± 8

Energy Saver+

± 5

Ecsta HS51

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

The professional test results behind the scores

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.

DisciplineCategoryEnergy Saver+Ecsta HS51ΔHead-to-head
Also published by the testers (not in the score)
Overall Ranking Overall #15/47 2018 AutoBild Summer Tyre Overview #3/11 2021 Autonavigator Summer Tire Test R16 – Different tests

Pros, cons & observations

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

Tire A Energy Saver+

Pros

  • Exceptional tread life: many owners report 40,000 to 100,000+ km, with some exceeding 120,000 km, and a few vehicles with very little wear after 40,000 miles
  • Strong dry grip and dry braking, with several reviewers describing it as excellent or phenomenal and stable at high speeds
  • Comfortable and quiet ride on motorways and rough roads, with several reviewers praising low noise

Cons

  • Wet-weather weaknesses are the most common complaint: reduced braking and cornering grip, aquaplaning and an unpredictable feel when pushed
  • Unsuited to spirited driving: the tyre slips easily under hard cornering, has soft sidewalls and feels bumpy in turns, and some owners report grip fading late in its life
  • Ageing issues reported by several owners, including sidewall or shoulder cracking and dry rotting at around 4 to 5 years
All owner themes in the Energy Saver+ review

Tire B Ecsta HS51

Pros

  • Impressive wet and dry weather traction
  • Excellent value for money compared to tier-one premium brands
  • Low road noise and enhanced ride comfort

Cons

  • Soft sidewalls can cause a wobbly or loose feeling during aggressive cornering
  • Some users experienced faster-than-expected tread wear on the front axle
  • Occasional complaints regarding poor steering feedback and high-speed handling at the limit
All owner themes in the Ecsta HS51 review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Michelin Energy Saver+ B · Kumho Ecsta HS51
CategorySummerSummer
Vehicle typePassenger Car / CrossoverPassenger Car / Crossover
Sizes available2427
Rim diameters14″ – 16″14″ – 18″
Sizes in common55

Which one should you actually buy?

Michelin Energy Saver+

Kumho Ecsta HS51

Too close to call: Michelin Energy Saver+ and Kumho Ecsta HS51 are within 2 points overall. Michelin Energy Saver+ is stronger on treadwear and comfort. Kumho Ecsta HS51 is stronger on wet and dry.

Pick tire A You want the longest tread life

Michelin Energy Saver+ scores 77 vs 70 on treadwear.

Pick tire B Your priority is wet-weather safety

Kumho Ecsta HS51 scores 76 vs 71 on wet.

Pick tire A You want the most comfortable ride

Michelin Energy Saver+ scores 72 vs 68 on comfort.

Pick tire B You want the most grip on dry roads

Kumho Ecsta HS51 scores 74 vs 71 on dry.

Tire A · Michelin Energy Saver+
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · Kumho Ecsta HS51
Check price on Amazon

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

Energy Saver+ or Ecsta HS51?

Which is better in the wet, Energy Saver+ or Ecsta HS51?

Kumho Ecsta HS51, 76 vs 71 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, Energy Saver+ or Ecsta HS51?

Kumho Ecsta HS51, 74 vs 71 on our dry score.

Which is more comfortable, Energy Saver+ or Ecsta HS51?

Michelin Energy Saver+, 72 vs 68 on our comfort score.

Which lasts longer, Energy Saver+ or Ecsta HS51?

Michelin Energy Saver+, 77 vs 70 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