Segment
1. Kumho Ecsta PS71 Upper-middle2. Fulda SportControl 2 Lowcost
Comparison: Fulda SportControl 2 vs. Kumho Ecsta PS71
Table of contents:
| # | Fulda SportControl 2 | Kumho Ecsta PS71 | Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R17 - R20 | R16 - R22 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
In this comparison, we will be looking at two summer tyres: the Fulda SportControl 2 and the Kumho Ecsta PS71. Both tyres have been tested in various categories, and we will summarise the results to help you make an informed decision when choosing between these two options.
Fulda SportControl 2
The Fulda SportControl 2 is a summer tyre that is rated at 84% by our experts. In the Autobild test, it ranked at position 12 out of 53 tested tyres. Its strengths were highlighted as its exterior noise, comfort, rolling resistance, and aquaplaning performance. On the other hand, in Autobild 2018 test, the tyre had issues related to extended wet braking distances and slightly delayed steering response.
The Fulda SportControl 2 does not have any previous models and has not yet been replaced by a newer model. Further information on this tyre can be found on the Fulda SportControl 2 page of the Fulda website.
Kumho Ecsta PS71
On the other side, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 is also a summer tyre, but with a slightly lower rating of 79% by our experts. In the same Autobild test as its competitor, the Ecsta PS71 ranked at position 18. Its strengths were balanced high-performance potential, good handling, short wet and dry braking distances. Nevertheless, the tyre received criticism for its increased driving noise.
Similar to the Fulda SportControl 2, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 does not have any previous models and has not yet been replaced by a newer model. Additional information regarding the Kumho Ecsta PS71 can be found on the Kumho Ecsta PS71 page of the Kumho website.
Conclusion
When comparing the Fulda SportControl 2 and the Kumho Ecsta PS71, it is essential to consider your specific needs and preferences, as both tyres offer different strengths and weaknesses. The Fulda SportControl 2 performs better in terms of exterior noise, comfort, rolling resistance, and aquaplaning, while the >Kumho Ecsta PS71 excels with its high-performance potential, handling, and shorter wet and dry braking distances.
Considering their positions in the same test (12th for Fulda vs. 18th for Kumho), the overall winner in this comparison would be the Fulda SportControl 2. However, as mentioned earlier, your final decision should be based on your specific requirements and preferences when it comes to attributes such as noise, comfort, and performance.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
1. Kumho Ecsta PS71 9.33
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Fulda SportControl 2 Exemplary2. Kumho Ecsta PS71 Highly recommended
Worst rating in test
1. Fulda SportControl 2 Satisfactory2. Kumho Ecsta PS71 Conditionally recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Aquaplaning - longitudal
Wet handling
Aquaplaning - cross
Wet circle cornering
Wet braking
Wet braking according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
Outside noise accoring to EU label
1. Fulda SportControl 2 70 dB2. Kumho Ecsta PS71 ? dB
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry handling
Dry braking
Costs
(Overall rating)Rolling resistance
Mileage
Price/value
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Wet | Dry | Running costs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2+ | 1- | 1 | ||||
| Fulda SportControl 2 Rating: Satisfactory | 2- | 2- | 2- | ||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Good | 2 | 2- | 2- | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 58.1 | 24.8 | |||||
| Fulda SportControl 2 | 63.9 | 29 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 | 61.7 | 26.6 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Running costs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1 | 1- | 1 | ||||
| Fulda SportControl 2 Rating: Good | 2 | 2+ | 2- | ||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Conditionally recommended | 1 | 2 | 3- | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 32,1 | 28,7 | |||||
| Fulda SportControl 2 | 34,2 | 31,7 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 | 34,9 | 29 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Running costs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||
| Fulda SportControl 2 Rating: Exemplary | 2 | 2+ | 2 | ||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 Rating: Satisfactory | 2 | 2- | 3- | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,2 | 28,7 | |||||
| Fulda SportControl 2 | 35,1 | 32 | |||||
| Kumho Ecsta PS71 | 37,1 | 31,6 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||