Menu
Kumho Crugen HP91 View Gallery (3)
215-315/35-70 R16-22 102 sizes 2016

Kumho Crugen HP91

The Crugen HP91 replaces the KL17. The HP91 features an asymmetric tread pattern combined with four wide circumferential grooves. Its silica-enhanced compound results in improved wet weather handling and braking, and a rolling resistance Kumho states is comparable to that of most passenger car tires. The product's other major attributes include strong high speed stability, low wear rates, and better resistance to aquaplaning. The HP91 is manufactured in in V, W and Y speed ratings and is available in sizes to fit, for example, the Range Rover and Range Rover Evoque, BMW X5 and X3, and Volvo XC90 and XC60.

8.2
Tire Reviews Score Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews
Medium Confidence View Breakdown
Dry Grip
89%
Wet Grip
86%
Road Feedback
78%
Handling
78%
Wear
67%
Comfort
79%
Buy again
72%
21 Reviews
78% Average
384,526 miles driven
3 Tests (avg: 6th)
Kumho Crugen HP91

Kumho Crugen HP91

Summer Mid-Range
BETA
8.2 / 10
Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews · Medium Confidence · Updated 23 Feb 2026

The Tire Reviews Score is the most comprehensive tire scoring system available. It aggregates professional test data from multiple independent publications, user reviews, and consistency analysis using Bayesian statistical methods, weighted normalisation, and recency-adjusted scoring to produce a single, reliable performance rating.

Learn more about our methodology
Comfort
86
0.32x / 1 test
Wet
76.1
2x / 5 tests
Value
67.6
0.42x / 2 tests
Off road
64.9
0.53x / 4 tests
Dry
57.7
1.8x / 4 tests

Cross-category scores are derived metrics that combine data from multiple test disciplines to evaluate real-world performance characteristics.

Traction
74.5
3 tests
Braking
73.1
4 tests
Handling
58.7
5 tests
Score Components
Professional Tests
Weight: 80%
Tests: 3
Publications: 2
Period: 2015 - 2018
User Reviews
Weight: 15%
Reviews: 21
Avg Rating: 78.4%
Min Required: 5
Consistency
Weight: 5%
Score Std Dev: 0.31
History Points: 10
Methodology & Configuration
Scoring Process
  1. Collect Test Data: Gather results from professional tire tests across multiple publications. Minimum 1 test(s) required.
  2. Normalize Positions: Convert test positions to percentile scores using exponential weighting (factor: 1.2).
  3. Apply Recency Weighting: More recent tests are weighted higher with a decay rate of 0.95.
  4. Incorporate User Reviews: Factor in user review data (minimum 5 reviews). Weight: 15%.
  5. Bayesian Smoothing: Apply Bayesian prior (score: 7, weight: 1.5) to prevent extreme scores with limited data.
  6. Calculate Final Score: Combine all components using normalization factor of 1.1. Max score with limited data: 9.5.
Component Weights
Test Data
80%
User Reviews
15%
Consistency
5%
All Configuration Parameters
ParameterValueDescription
safety_weight 0.7 Weight multiplier for safety-related metrics
performance_weight 0.55 Weight multiplier for performance metrics
comfort_weight 0.4 Weight multiplier for comfort metrics
value_weight 0.45 Weight multiplier for value-for-money metrics
user_reviews_weight 0.15 How much user reviews contribute to the final score
test_data_weight 0.8 How much professional test data contributes to the final score
consistency_weight 0.05 How much score consistency contributes to the final score
recency_decay_rate 0.95 Rate at which older test results lose influence (higher = slower decay)
min_test_count 1 Minimum number of professional tests required
min_review_count 5 Minimum number of user reviews required
score_version 1.9 Current version of the scoring algorithm
score_normalization_factor 1.1 Factor used to normalize raw scores to the 0-10 scale
confidence_factor_weight 0.2 How much data confidence affects the final score
position_penalty_weight 0.2 Penalty applied for poor test positions
gap_penalty_threshold 12 Score gap (%) that triggers additional penalties
min_metrics_count 2 Minimum number of test metrics needed per test
limited_data_threshold 2 Number of tests below which data is considered limited
single_test_penalty 0.75 Score multiplier when only one test is available
critical_metric_penalty 0.7 Penalty for poor performance on critical safety metrics
critical_metric_threshold 70 Score below which a critical metric penalty applies
position_exponential_factor 1.2 Exponent used to amplify position-based scoring
position_exponential_threshold 0.9 Position percentile below which exponential scoring applies
gap_multiplier_critical 3 Multiplier for critical gap penalties
max_category_weight 2 Maximum weight any single category can have
max_score_limited_data 9.5 Score cap when data is limited
bayesian_prior_weight 1.5 Weight of the Bayesian prior in smoothing
bayesian_prior_score 7 Prior score used for Bayesian smoothing
evidence_test_multiplier 1.9 Multiplier for test evidence in confidence calculation
evidence_metric_divisor 3 Divisor for metric count in evidence calculation
evidence_review_divisor 10 Divisor for review count in evidence calculation
combined_penalty_floor 0.2
Data Sources
TestPublicationDateSizePositionMetrics
2018 All Road 265/60 R18 4x4 Tire Test Auto Bild Allrad 2018 265/60 R18 5/8 12 metrics
2017 Auto Bild Summer SUV Tire Test Auto Bild Allrad 2017 235/50 R18 8/10 4 metrics
2015 Off Road SUV 4x4 Tire Test Off Road 2015 255/55 R18 6/9 0 metrics
3
Tests
6th
Average
5th
Best
8th
Worst
Latest Tire Test Results
High grip on sand and mud, balance in the wet, well priced.
Slow steering and understeer in the dry.
Satisfactory.
8th/10
Good comfort and low noise, high traction on grass and dirt, low price
Average grip on wet and dry roads
6th/9
High resistance to aquaplaning, low rolling resistance
Average handling and long braking distances on wet surfaces

Alternative Tires

9.3/10
81% 18 reviews
8.0/10
94% 10 reviews
7.9/10
83% 35 reviews
7.5/10
83% 7 reviews
7.1/10
89% 7 reviews
6.4/10
91% 5 reviews
Size Fuel Wet Noise
17 inch
235/65R17 104 V C C 71
265/65R17 112 V C B 72
235/65R17 104 V C C 71
265/65R17 112 V C B 72
18 inch
235/60R18 107 V XL C B 72
235/60R18 107 V XL B B 72
235/60R18 107 V XL C B 72
View All Sizes and EU Label Scores for the Kumho Crugen HP91 >>

Questions and Answers for the Kumho Crugen HP91

Ask a question
November 20, 2022

Is the Kumho Crugen HP91 a run flat tire ?

It doesn't seem that there are any runflat sizes of the HP91, though we don't have an exhaustive list.
October 19, 2024

Does the Kumho Crugen HP91 235/55 R19 W (105) incorporate rim protection on the tire

We have not tested the Kumho Crugen HP91, but looking at pictures it does not seem to have a raised bar for rim protection.
Ask a question

We will never publish or share your email address

captcha

To verify you are human please type the word you see in the box below.

Size Price Range  
Available in 2 tire sizes - View all.

Review Summary

Based on 19 user reviews

Most drivers rate the Kumho Crugen HP91 highly, praising its strong wet and dry grip, quiet ride, solid handling/feedback, and good braking, with several noting excellent value and confidence even when towing or on light off-road surfaces. Many high-scoring reviews report stable performance over long distances and in varied weather. A minority of users experienced faster-than-expected tread wear, which tempered otherwise positive impressions. Overall sentiment is strongly positive with wear concerns noted by some owners.

Strengths
  • Wet and dry grip
  • Low noise/quiet ride
  • Handling and steering feedback
  • Braking performance
  • Value for money
  • Towing and light off-road capability
  • Ride comfort
Areas for Improvement
  • Faster tread wear/shorter lifespan for some users

Top 3 Kumho Crugen HP91 Reviews

Given 96% while driving a Audi Q5 (255/45 R20) on a combination of roads for 43,000 average miles
These were the tires that were fitted with my new Audi 2018 Q5 by the dealer. I have driven them for 70.000km over 8 years without a problem, in a mix of city and highway (in Belgium where it rains a lot). I have also driven them in winter conditions and a bit of offroad. I have never had any problems, so I have to say they performed well for my application until their end of life.
July 20, 2025
Given 19% while driving a Renault Koleos (225/55 R19) on mostly town for 0 average miles
Worst tires of my life. It burst for no reason. They refused the warranty, although I bought it 6 months ago along with a new car. If you love and value yourself and your family, do not buy this
December 30, 2024
Given 39% while driving a Hyundai Santa Fe (235/60 R18) on a combination of roads for 26 average miles
bought a 2022 Hyundai santa fe in March 2022 brand new. has the Kumho crugen 235/60r18 only 26,000 miles on these tires and the treads are now at 3!
These tires are garbage! I do not drive the vehicle alot but i do drive almost every day. makes no sense that these tires,which Kumho refers to as premium tires would wear out so quickly. Kumho tires are inferior and garbage! do not purchase a vehicle with these tires on it. you will be replacing tires quickly. Pay no attention to the fact that these are advertised with a 65,000 mile warranty. does not mean a thing. They might last 25,000 miles if you are lucky.
August 7, 2025

How would you rate the Kumho Crugen HP91?

Click a star to start your review

Latest Kumho Crugen HP91 Reviews

Given 55% while driving a Hyundai Santa Fe (235/60 R18) on mostly country roads for 500 average miles
Came as OEM for my Hyundai Santa Fe TM Facelift. Using this car for family road trip, with average driving style, sometime spirited driving when needed in highway/intercity road. Found it quite good in dry condition, but bad in wet condition. I don't feel confident driving in wet, considering this is relatively new tire that came with a new car. Feedback and handling is average, and it's noisy. I can imagine how loud it's going to be when approaching it's end of cycle.
October 6, 2024
Given 96% while driving a Kia Motors Sorento 2.5 XE Manual (255/50 R19) on a combination of roads for 20,000 spirited miles
Great tires, far better than the Goodyear Wrangler I had before. There's no problem with them, they brake well, they don't skid, great on a wet road. Surprisingly good tires for a small price, I'll probably buy them again.
January 12, 2022
Given 96% while driving a Kia Motors Sorento EX 2.5 (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 25,000 spirited miles
I replaced Continental with Kumho Crugen HP91 3 years ago. I have covered about 40,000 km and I am very happy with the tires. Very reliable, non-slip, good braking, very good tires for a moderate price, on a par with premium competitors. By the way, I drive a KIA Sorento, and the tires are 255/50 R19.
November 13, 2021
Given 47% while driving a Hyundai Santa Fe (235/60 R18) on a combination of roads for 45,000 easy going miles
The tire started shredding on with 30000 km, they tires came with the car as brand new from factory. Hyundai sante fe. I stay in South Africa
October 26, 2021
Given 97% while driving a Kia Motors sorento (255/55 R19) on a combination of roads for 30,000 average miles
Supplied new with a Kia Sorento which does a lot of towing a 1600 kg caravan. Done 30k miles before needing new. No problems with wet or dry grip or on wet grass. Not noisy. Only drive at normal speeds but handles well in sports mode on twisty roads. Will replace with same.
August 26, 2021
Given 89% while driving a Mercedes Benz Mercedes (235/60 R16) on mostly country roads for 8,000 easy going miles
Drove these on W140 for a year and 12000km - great tires, I use Kumho on my other cars as the price and quality are very good.
April 24, 2021
Given 81% while driving a Audi SQ5 (255/40 R21 W) on mostly town for 6,000 average miles
Bought a full set of Kumho Crugen HP91's about 12 months ago as replacements for the factory fitted Pirelli P-Zero's on my 2015 Audi SQ5. The Pirelli's were a good performer, but are stupidly expensive to replace and due to the relatively low treadwear rating they wear out very quickly (around 12,000miles / 20,000km's) and wore on the edges predominantly. Knowing I wanted to move away from the expensive Pirelli's, I found the Kumho's which rated well on multiple websites I looked at (including Tiresales.uk) for overall quality, grip and quietness, were much more reasonably priced, had a higher treadwear rating of 420 (vs 300 on the Pirelli's) so they should last longer when driven in the same manner, and had a more square shape which should help the tire wear evenly (instead of on the edges like the rounded off Pirelli's). Overall very happy with the Kumho's, they have been on the car now for around 12 months and about 6-7k miles (10,000kms). The tires are quiet to drive on, grip well in both wet and dry conditions, are wearing evenly and slowly, and look better on the rim compared to the Pirelli's. Steering feel/feedback was also noticeably better with the Kumho's, but hard to compare that aspect on brand new tires to the worn out Pirelli's they replaced.
May 18, 2020
Given 95% while driving a BMW X3 2.0d Sport (235/50 R18 W) on a combination of roads for 2,000 spirited miles
Love these tires, they're a bit of a softer compound however they grip much better than hard compound Eco tires.

These grip extremely well in the wet and dry, safety comes first for me and I've always been impressed with Kumho bang for buck.

In my opinion, the increase in price to go for Pirelli or Michelin is not worth it, I've had them and they're only about 15% better for 2x the cost. Sometimes not even better at all.

Turn in with wet weather is very good, I was actually surprised when my wife attached a round about pretty fast, I was expecting understeer on the front end but they're perfect. Very hard to make them spin in wet or dry weather, even with my Diesel which will spin Eco tides with ease.

Definitely buying again.
December 13, 2019
Given 83% while driving a BMW X3 (235/45 R19 V) on a combination of roads for 15,000 easy going miles
I have bougth those tires to replace my front tires for my BMW X3 (3.0sd, twin turbo 286 HP, 6 speed automatic, 4wd) in June 2018.
GRIP: DRY: Average, Not good as KU39s, but they are safe enough.
WET: Average. Not good as KU39s, but safe enough.
BRAKING: DRY: Good,
WET: Good.
WEAR: Very good. Expected life is around 35000 miles. I have driven around 6000 kms in Ukrainian roads. They have extreme potholes and bumps, and my car has faced them frequently. My left front suspension has been broken but my tires and rims did not! I have used them with 36 to 40 psi pressures for my front tires (BMW recommends 36 psi for fully loaded car) taking into account 3 psi pressure loss per month and my monthly tire pressure check schedule. (Overpressure: Max Fuel economy, Acceptable grip, Recommended pressure: Normal Fuel economy, Max Grip, Low pressure: Low Fuel economy, unacceptable grip and wear)
FUEL ECONOMY: They are economic whenever you use them high pressures like I have told above.
BUY AGAIN: May be but, I priorly prefer Kumho KU39 or Hankook S1Evo if I can find the related measure. Because, their feedback and comfort better marginally.
October 24, 2019
Given 87% while driving a Ford Kuga (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 500 average miles
Having used Kumho Ecsta model which this tire replaced I don't expect these to last long, however it's generally a toss up between grip and longevity with tires and grip is far more important to me. These perform brilliantly with excellent grip in both wet and dry conditions, feedback is excellent as is handling with only a little roll when cornering hard. Compared to the Michelin Primacy tires these replaced they are extremely comfortable, giving a much smoother drive with less noise. I did less than 100 miles on the Michelin tires so can't really compare the other qualities.

I have marked these down for wear based on previous experience but will update my rating in time if required.
May 24, 2019
Given 74% while driving a Hyundai ix35 (225/55 R18 V) on mostly motorways for 12,000 average miles
I've been buying Kumho tires for my cars for well over 10 years now. My most recent purchase of Crugen HP91s has made me reconsider buying them in the future. In terms of grip, handling, comfort and feedback there was nothing out of the ordinary. However these appeared to wear a lot quicker than any other Kumhos I've had before. They lasted just 15 months (12,000 miles) before my car failed the MOT on them. I've owned the same car for 3 years, and prior to the Crugen HP91s it had the tires that were fitted by the previous owner, which lasted well over 2 years and 20,000 miles with me.
February 25, 2019
Given 83% while driving a Subaru XV 2.0 D (225/55 R17 W) on a combination of roads for 9,000 spirited miles
tires were supplied new with the car and from the first drive the tires were great for handling dry and wet weather used for one bad winter and the tires worked well in the snow and ice. a little bit of tire roll on fast cornering. over all a pretty good tire just disappointed at how quick the tire wore out .
October 25, 2018
Rate the Kumho Crugen HP91