Segment
1. BFGoodrich Advantage Upper-middle2. Kumho Ecsta HS51 Upper-middle
Comparison: BFGoodrich Advantage vs. Kumho Ecsta HS51
Table of contents:
| # | BFGoodrich Advantage | Kumho Ecsta HS51 | Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R14 - R20 | R14 - R18 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
Let's take a closer look at two summer tyres: BFGoodrich Advantage and Kumho Ecsta HS51. We'll compare their performance based on a variety of tests and provide a comprehensive overview of their strengths and weaknesses.
The BFGoodrich Advantage scored 76% in our rating system, making it a reliable option for your summer rides. Particularly, it scored high in dry handling, positioning in Autobild's test at 18 amongst 53 tyres. In ADAC's test, the BFGoodrich Advantage also performed well, occupying the 9th position out of 15 tyres. Its major strength was its fuel efficiency, a key factor for a smooth and economical ride. However, no information is provided regarding its country of manufacture or whether it is the first equipment. The Advantage tyre does not have a newer model to replace it, making it a standalone choice in the BFGoodrich summer series. You can learn more about BFGoodrich's offerings here.
On the other hand, the Kumho Ecsta HS51 scored 45% in our rating system. Despite being a lower score, the tyre displayed impressive performance in various tests. It ranked 3rd in Autobild's test, highly commended for its aquaplaning - both cross and longitudinal, price-value relationship, wet handling, and wet side guide. In ADAC's test, it held the 5th position and proved its prowess in fuel efficiency, aquaplaning - cross and longitudinal, exterior noise, and wet circle cornering. Manufactured in China (CN), the HS51 has been replaced by the Kumho Ecsta HS52, signifying a continuous strive for improvement. Information about Kumho's summer range can be found here.
In conclusion, the BFGoodrich Advantage shines in fuel efficiency and dry handling, suitable for those seeking consistent performance and economy. The Kumho Ecsta HS51 stands out with its superior handling in wet conditions and impressive fuel efficiency. Both tyres hold their own unique strengths and are reliable for summer conditions. The choice between the two ultimately depends on your driving preference, with the BFGoodrich Advantage providing excellent dry road performance and the Kumho Ecsta HS51 excelling in wet condition handling.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
2. BFGoodrich Advantage 12.75
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Kumho Ecsta HS51 Exemplary
Worst rating in test
1. Kumho Ecsta HS51 Satisfactory2. BFGoodrich Advantage Sufficient
Wet
(Overall rating)Aquaplaning - cross
Wet braking
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Wet handling
Wet braking according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
Outside noise accoring to EU label
2. Kumho Ecsta HS51 ? dB
Costs
(Overall rating)Mileage
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Wet | Dry | Running costs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1- | 2+ | 1 | ||||
| BFGoodrich Advantage Rating: Satisfactory | 2- | 2+ | 2- | ||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS51 Rating: Exemplary | 1- | 2+ | 2+ | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,1 | 29,6 | |||||
| BFGoodrich Advantage | 36,7 | 31,9 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta HS51 | 34,8 | 30,4 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Noise | Wear | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1,8 | 1,4 | 2,7 | 0,6 | |||
| BFGoodrich Advantage Rating: Satisfactory | 2,9 | 2,2 | 2,8 | 2,0 | |||
| Kumho Ecsta HS51 Rating: Satisfactory | 2,2 | 2,6 | 2,8 | 2,0 | |||
| Show test details | |||||||