Kumho Ecsta HS52

The Kumho Ecsta HS52 is a Premium Touring Summer tire designed to be fitted to Passenger Cars.

Tire review data from 12 tire reviews averaging 82% over 73,580 miles driven, and 7 tests with an average result of 5th.

Dry Grip 90%
Wet Grip 81%
Road Feedback 85%
Handling 84%
Wear 81%
Comfort 67%
Buy again 89%

First On MarketOctober 2021
Wheel Size14 - 20"
Width175 - 245mm
Profile45 - 65
Rolling ResistanceA - D
Wet GripA - B
Noise (dB)69 - 72
Winter RatingNot Winter Rated

The Ecsta HS52 is ranked 29th of 152 Summer Premium Touring tires.

This tire replaced the Kumho Ecsta HS51.

Tests Included

7

Best Result

2nd

Worst Result

8th

Average Result

5th

Latest Tire Test Results

2024 AutoBild Summer Tire Test
4th of 21 tires
  • Convincing performance on wet and dry roads, short wet and dry braking distances, affordable price.
  • Moderate rolling comfort.
  • Good.
View Full Test >>
2024 ADAC Summer Tire Test
3rd of 16 tires
  • The Kumho Ecsta HS52 earns a solid rating in driving safety, providing good steering feedback and secure handling at the limit on dry roads, complemented by a short braking distance. On wet roads, it impresses with its braking performance and wet handling, offering good grip and easy, secure maneuverability. However, its aquaplaning performance is rated as average. Overall, the Kumho receives a good rating for wet performance. In terms of environmental impact, the Kumho achieves only an average outcome. While it scores well in projected mileage and wear, its higher tire weight results in only average efficiency. The sustainability of this tire, produced in China/Korea, is rated as sufficient.
View Full Test >>

2024 Tire Tests

2023 Tire Tests

2022 Tire Tests

SizeFuelWetNoise
14 inch
185/60 R14 82 HDB70
175/65 R14 82 HDB70
175/65 R14 82 HDB70
15 inch
185/65 R15 88 HAB70
185/65 R15 88 HCB70
195/55 R15 85 HDA71
195/65 R15 91 HCA71
185/65 R15 88 HCB70
195/65 R15 91 VCA71
195/55 R15 85 VDA71
195/65 R15 91 HCA71
195/55 R15 85 VDA71
16 inch
205/55 R16 94 V XLCA72
205/55 R16 94 V XLCA72
205/55 R16 91 VCA71
215/60 R16 95 VAA70
215/60 R16 95 VAA70
205/55 R16 91 VCA71
17 inch
225/60 R17 99 VBA71
View All Sizes and EU Label Scores for the Kumho Ecsta HS52 >>

Questions and Answers for the Kumho Ecsta HS52

2023-03-11 - Does this tire have Alloy Wheel Rim protection built into the sidewall?

The size of the HS52 tire reviews tested (205/55 R16) did not have any rim protection built into the tire, however it might be that larger sizes of the HS52 do have rim protection. Kumho will be able to give you the best answer based on your size.


Ask a question

We will never publish or share your email address

capatha

To verify you're human please type the word you see above in the box below.


YouTube Review

Top 3 Kumho Ecsta HS52 Reviews

Given 75% while driving a BMW 530D (225/55 R16) on mostly country roads for 200 spirited miles
First of all, I'm comparing these primarily to the Kumho HM KH 31 (older HP summer tire), Bridgestone Turanza T005, Nexen N'fera SU4 and Continental WinterContact TS850P (winter), which all have been fitted to the same car before. The new Kumho Ecsta HS52 have been fitted to the car for only about 200 miles now, which were mostly windy country roads (in the dry and wet), but also a bit of motorway and town, no city driving so far. Of course, I have no idea how these will last over the long term, but I'd like to give some first impressions on this fairly new tire. The Kumho Ecsta HS52, at least in 225/55R16 for the European Market, are made in China, and this is the first set of tires out of Chinese production (that I've driven), that I would definitely buy again and recommend without doubt to everyone looking for a good set of balanced summer touring tires (on a low to mid budget) ready for some spirited interludes. All of the following statements are, of course, just my own subjective impressions and are based on a comparison with the tires mentioned above: [Dry grip] The grip in the dry, laterally und longitudinally, appears to be upper mid class. Especially laterally, the tire feels close to a HP tire, which I assume is due to the quite wide strip of positive tread on the outer edge, that most touring tire don't have to offer. [Wet grip] The grip in the wet is about mid class, which is all you could wish for at the price. However, the relation between the maximum possible lateral and longitudinal acceleration changes compared to dry grip. Now, while the lateral grip is, as mentioned, mid class, the longitudinal grip exceeds the lateral. While this phenomenon is quite common, especially among touring tires (and tuned like that on purpose by the manufacturer), on this tire, it seems to be a lot more distinct in the wet. So, this tire seems to ensure the ability to come to a sudden stop in an emergency, even when under intermediate lateral acceleration. Kamm’s friction circle mutates to a rounded rectangle, if you know what I mean, which gives you a lot of extra safety in the wet. I don’t have a lot of information about aqua planing yet, as I only found a few puddles in the last days, but so far they seem to behave well enough. All in all, wet grip is comparable neither to the wet performance of a real cheap budget tire on the low end, nor to an expensive premium tire on the top end. So, they still cannot compete with the likes of a Bridgestone or Continental here, keep that in mind. [Steering] Something, that Kumho is good on, and what I really liked about the HS52, is a quite nimble and precise feel in the steering (for a touring tire, but even compared to some HP tires at 55% HTW ratio). Every small steering input will immediately result in a change of direction, which gives you a good track guidance on the highway/motorway, and which is a real joy to cut corners with. Steering response is relatively strong, talking about lateral forces, but feedback from the road surface or potholes is neither too intense nor precise. [Lateral feel] Cornering at the limit, there is a fair amount of understeer. The warning about reaching the limits sets in in form of low frequent vibrations induced in the vehicle body, maybe also a bit in the steering column. The warning happens quite early (lateral acceleration approx. 5-6 m/s^2) and lasts until the real limits are reached. Then, the reactions are easily controllable at every time. That said, the tires still never really feel soft, and maintain a relatively high lateral stiffness (again, for a touring tire). That’s why I did not perceive the “understeer budget” the vehicle is given as annoying or disappointing, because it’s only prevalent at higher Lateral accelerations you usually don’t reach on the road, and it doesn’t feel any soft before. That might be a different case with a FWD vehicle that has more load on the front and no need for a high understeer budget. Lateral tread shift also feels to remain small, so generation of overturning torque is a very small issue here. [Longitudinal feel] On the brakes, the car always feels safe and settled. There is very low noise or vibrations on a full braking maneuver (as opposed to the vibrations when cornering), the whole chassis remains relatively quiet and calm, the tires just do their job to stop it. As for braking distances, again, subjectively these feel like upper mid class, cannot compete with specialized tires like UHP, track or rain tires, but for what they are, they didn’t disappoint me so far. Like in lateral direction, the longitudinal stiffness also appears to be quite high (for a thin-walled touring tire), so trailing arm bushings have a lot to absorb when applying the brakes, coming to a stop, or hitting bumps on the road. Especially for owners of older BMWs: Tested on a 2003 530d E39 sedan, I felt like the characteristics of these tire are as close at gets to the ones BMW tuned and adjusted the behavior of the ESC (DSC) with in these days. The same goes for the ABS. On all tires I’ve driven this car before, I never liked the tuning of the system, killing the “joy of use” by intervening a lot too early, but not hard enough if really needed, and for too long on some instances, when one axle lost traction. With the Kumho Ecsta HS52, it’s a completely different story, the control unit has a real idea about the characteristics of the tires, the inventions are on point, safe, and don’t prevent you from having some fun…. [Comfort] You could guess from the distinct stiffness in both, longitudinal and lateral direction, that these tires are not the most comfortable ones. So, also vertical stiffness is relatively high. At least, suspension comfort does not seem to be worse than on some older Kumhos, so they’re working on it. Having a really comfortable suspension of the BMW E39 sedan as a basis, I can’t complain, but would not recommend fitting these tires to a vehicle with stiffer suspension for travelling or the daily commute, unless you really want to feel the road. Noise comfort, measured subjectively, is very good, which stands opposed to the EU-label stating barely average noise comfort at 72dB. I may add, that I evaluated noise comfort not only based on straight-line rolling noise, but also based on “cornering whine” and “full braking squeal”, which both barely seem to exist on the HS52. [Miscellaneous] Tread depth on a new tire in 225/55R16 is not that much at 6,9…7,0 mm, but on par with many competitors in the segment, so lets see how long these will last. There is no sidewall or rim protection at all, but from previous incidents with older Kumhos I can tell that the sidewalls themselves are quite durable when mated with a curb even at higher speeds, so I’m optimistic about these as well….. I wasn’t able to really test rolling resistance, but judged by the speed loss when coasting and the heat they generate on the highway, it seems to be okay and the EU-label “C” could be correct (Which should be axiomatic, but I experienced some major increases of rolling resistance when tires came from different production sites/countries than originally tested for the label, especially from Asia). Fuel consumption on the long term will tell about that a bit more precisely, I hope. I do not have any experiences on reliability, wear pattern and absolute wear by now. All in all, a great mid-class tire, suited for the daily commute, touring, and even some spirited drives on country roads, that gives you anything you could ask for, given the price tag.
Helpful 167 - tire reviewed on April 8, 2022
Given 87% while driving a Volkswagen Golf (205/55 R16) on mostly country roads for 5,000 spirited miles
For a 16 inch tire it feels pretty sporty! I'm impressed with them, came from the PS3.
Helpful 51 - tire reviewed on October 1, 2022
Given 64% while driving a Volvo S60 2.5T (205/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 30 spirited miles
way to noisy and vibrational for me
Helpful 35 - tire reviewed on August 2, 2023
Have you driven on the Kumho Ecsta HS52 tire?

Have YOU got experience with the Kumho Ecsta HS52? Help millions of other tire buyers

Review your Kumho Ecsta HS52 >

Latest Kumho Ecsta HS52 Reviews

Given 90% while driving a Peugeot 207cc (205/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 500 average miles
So I will be comparing it to the last 2 sets of tires before the Kumhos. Toyo proxes cf2 & Nokian Line. So middle/ upper middle class tires.

First of all sound; l would say all 3 have a similar level of road sound, which is remarkably low. And that reminds me when l tried Kumho KU31 back in 2015 which was so hard & loud, so that’s a huge improvement for Kumho in that section.

Then comes the comfort, and l believe that the HS52 is midway between being too soft+ comfortable & too hard+tough. And that suits my driving on a combination of different roads and conditions.

Being in the summer, I haven’t tried the wet grip yet but the dry grip is decent and l feel safe driving the car near it’s limits.

It’s too early for me to comment on the longevity but l will update that later on.

Overall, l’m satisfied with my purchase and l believe that the HS52 is an excellent value for money amongst most competitors.
Helpful 0 - tire reviewed on September 5, 2024
Given 80% while driving a Mitsubishi Attrage GS (175/65 R14) on mostly town for 500 easy going miles
I put the tires on my small car size 175 65 14. What I got when I first touched the road was very good, different from the original Dunlop tires. that I was clear before The Kumho is quiet and can feel its grip on straight roads and curves. I definitely recommend it to all my friends.
Helpful 8 - tire reviewed on May 16, 2024
What to know the BEST All Season Tires for 2024? Click to find out!
Given 81% while driving a Citroën C3 (205/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 1,500 average miles
Very good on dry roads, excellent handling,it isn't very comfortable but it is very safe on braking.
Helpful 30 - tire reviewed on August 23, 2023
Given 100% while driving a BMW 218i (205/60 R16) on mostly country roads for 35,000 easy going miles
I'm really happy about this tires. After changing my winter tires (Bridgestone), the difference is incredible. Dry handling and brake : Super good tires, really impressed. Wet handling and brake : Nothing to say, they are great. Wear : Too soon to say something.
Helpful 32 - tire reviewed on March 17, 2023
Given 85% while driving a Kia Motors Rio (195/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 10,350 average miles
After reading a few reviews about the Kumho ECSTA HS52 and considering the affordable price for the 195/55 r16 tire size I decided to buy them. I was happilly surprised how well the car handled especially on braking in the dry and wet, very short distance to stop and very stable. Comfort was okay, not too hard over rough roads and potholes, but a bit noisy ,mostly at high speeds. Economy is good with relaxed driving I achieved around 39 mpg and with more aggressive it rose to about 30 mpg. Couldn't judge the aquaplaning because I didn't find myself facing such heavy rain and standing water. Wear is good almost no difference between the rear and front tires( front wheel drive car) and they still have a lot of tread left. For now my experience driving on the tires is good, I will continue to use them next season and will update after.
Helpful 37 - tire reviewed on November 17, 2022
Given 89% while driving a Fiat croma (205/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 5,000 average miles
Impressive summer tire can compare performance to Nexen Su1 in 17" but I drive 16" now, Kumho make good tires.
Helpful 47 - tire reviewed on September 28, 2022
Given 80% while driving a Ford fusion (235/45 R18) on a combination of roads for 8,000 average miles
It does everything I've asked it to do in daily driving in town and motorways. Tire pressure is very sensitive to comfort, slightly higher and it becomes very uncomfortable, must always be in the sweet spot. Overall grip is fantastic and I am very happy with the purchase.
Helpful 47 - tire reviewed on August 20, 2022