Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- TR Score
- 9.2/10
- Owners say
- 84% · 41
- TR Score
- 9.0/10
- Owners say
- 83% · 7
In the 4 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 finished ahead 3 times and the Ultrac Pro once. The Ecsta Sport PS72 stopped 5.3% shorter in the wet; the Ultrac Pro had 3.3% lower rolling resistance.
Data updated
Which should you buy?
Pick the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 if you want the best blend of wet-stopping confidence, strong all-round performance, and the most compelling value/longevity. Choose the Vredestein Ultrac Pro if low noise and low rolling resistance are top priorities (especially in larger, SUV-style fitments where it tested exceptionally well) and you're willing to trade some cost efficiency and potential variability across sizes.
Where the Ecsta Sport PS72 is stronger
- Wet braking performance leadership across the dataset (wins 3/4 tests), including a major advantage in the 2025 UHP test (23.07 m vs 26.82 m)
- Strong value/ownership case where measured: better projected wear (48,230 km vs 42,100 km) and better value metric (12.44 vs 15.2 price/1000) in the 2026 Autobild test; also noted as the cheapest tyre in the SUV test
- Competitive dynamics on dry with flashes of strength (wins dry handling in the 2026 SUV test: 104.6 vs 103.1 km/h; praised for dynamic dry handling)
Where the Ultrac Pro is stronger
- Lower noise in measured tests, with clear gaps (e.g., 69.1 dB vs 72.9 dB in the SUV test; 71.0 dB vs 74.1 dB in Autobild)
- Lower rolling resistance in most shared tests (e.g., 6.92 vs 7.62 kg/t in the SUV test; 7.65 vs 8.15 kg/t in Autobild), supporting efficiency
- Often marginally better dry braking (wins 3/4 tests, typically by ~0.2 m), and strong dry handling credibility in Autobild (101 vs 100 km/h) with high subjective dry score (8.7 vs 8.0)
The bullet points are analysis of the shared tests and of owner reviews; the measured wins in each discipline are in the tables below. Where the two disagree, the figures are right.
Ecsta Sport PS72 vs Ultrac Pro at a glance
| Category | Ecsta Sport PS72 | Gap | Ultrac Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared tests won4 shared tests | 3 | 1 | |
| Dry8 measurements | 3 | 5 | |
| Wet15 measurements | 10 | The Ecsta Sport PS72 stopped 5.3% shorter in the wet (4 tests) | 4 |
| Off road4 measurements | 3 | 1 | |
| Comfort5 measurements | 0 | The Ultrac Pro was 3.5 dB quieter (2 tests) | 2 |
| Value5 measurements | 3 | 2 | |
| Tyre Reviews Scoreevery test and review we hold | 9.2/10 | The Ecsta Sport PS72 by 0.2 | 9.0/10 |
| Owner rating41 and 7 reviews | 84% | Too close to call | 83% |
| Would buy againshare of owners | 82% | The Ecsta Sport PS72 by 11 points | 71% |
| Pricein the 3 tests that listed prices | Cheaper | The Ultrac Pro was dearer in 2 of 3 | +5.2% |
| Sizes madeEU label registrations | 86 | 50 sizes made in both | 98 |
Wins count every measurement the shared tests recorded for both tyres; a tick marks the tyre ahead on that line. Subjective driver scores count as wins but are never averaged, because each test uses its own scale.
Head to head in 4 tests, 2025 to 2026
Each row is one published test in which both tyres ran on the same car, in the same size, on the same day. The line is the whole field, winner on the left.
| Test | Ecsta Sport PS72 | Field | Ultrac Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 Summer SUV Tyre Test | P6 of 9 | P2 of 9 | |
| 2026 Autobild Summer Tyre Test | P6 of 20 | P9 of 20 | |
| 2026 Summer Braking Super Tyre Test - How do 52 Tyres Perform in Wet and Dry Braking? | P4 of 50 | P13 of 50 | |
| 2025 Die Reifentester UHP Summer Tyre Test | P1 of 8 | P8 of 8 |
Performance profile
12 measurements from the 4 shared tests, each tyre shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
Ecsta Sport PS72
Ultrac Pro
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
In each test the better of the two figures counts as 100% and the other as its share of it, so a 36 m stop against 34.2 m is 95%; each spoke averages the shared tests that recorded it. The scale stops at 92%: a point further in sits on the hub's edge, hollow. 7 measurements recorded in only one shared test are left off; every measurement is in the table further down.
Where each scores higher
Ecsta Sport PS72
Ultrac Pro
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
Category scores are percentiles among tyres of the same season and class: 90 means this tyre out-performs 90% of them, measured across every test we hold, not only the ones it appeared in.
Where owners rate each higher
Ecsta Sport PS72
Ultrac Pro
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
Owners rate the Ecsta Sport PS72 84% from 41 reviews and the Ultrac Pro 83% from 7. Each spoke is one question owners answer out of 10; reviews are vetted by hand before publication.
Every measurement, side by side
Averages of the figures both tyres posted in the same tests. The gap is the average of each test's own gap, so figures from different cars and years are never mixed. Open a discipline for its measurements, and a measurement for every test's figure.
| Measurement | Ecsta Sport PS72 | Gap | Ultrac Pro | Wins | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 34.46 | 0.3% | 34.36 | 1-3 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 102.3 | 0.2% | 102.1 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | 8.1% | scored | 1-1 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 36.74 | 5.3% | 38.13 | 3-1 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 84.55 | 0.1% | 84.65 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | 79.4% | scored | 2-0 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 17.7 | 0.3% | 17.75 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 85.33 | = | 85.4 | 2-1 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 2.92 | 1% | 2.87 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 63.8 | 0.3% | 63.6 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 10,810 | 8.1% | 10,003 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 10,019 | 1.3% | 10,147 | 0-1 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 2,584 | 1.4% | 2,548 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | = | scored | 0-0 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | = | scored | 0-0 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 73.5 | 3.5 dB | 70.05 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 48,230 | 14.6% | 42,100 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 8.3 | 3.3% | 8.07 | 1-2 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| 1,605 | 0.7% | 1,617 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Braking distances and lap times are better when lower; speeds, wear and grip figures when higher. A test's figures are its own: sizes, cars, surfaces and temperatures differ from one to the next, which is why the averages here are only ever of tests the two tyres shared. "Scored" rows are subjective driver ratings: each test uses its own scale, so only the wins are counted.
Scores beyond the shared tests
On the Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Ecsta Sport PS72 scores 9.2 and the Ultrac Pro 9 out of 10.
| Ecsta Sport PS72 | Category | Ultrac Pro | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 92 | Dry | 86 | ||
| 88 | Wet | 82 | ||
| 35 | Comfort | 80 | ||
| 49 | Value | 27 | ||
Category scores are percentiles among tyres of the same season and class: 90 means this tyre out-performs 90% of them, measured across every test we hold, not only the ones it appeared in.
What owners say
| Ecsta Sport PS72 | Category | Ultrac Pro | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 | Dry Grip | 9.1 | ||
| 8.8 | Wet Grip | 8.9 | ||
| 8.6 | Road Feedback | 8.3 | ||
| 8.6 | Handling | 9 | ||
| 8.3 | Wear | 6 | ||
| 7.7 | Comfort | 8.1 | ||
Owners rate the Ecsta Sport PS72 84% from 41 reviews and the Ultrac Pro 83% from 7. Reviews are vetted by hand before publication; ownership is not verified.
Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
- 84%from 41 reviews
- 82%would buy again
- 160,312 milesdriven by reviewers
Owners rate the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 highly overall (average 81.6%), most often praising its strong value for money and genuinely impressive dry performance, with confident handling and high-speed stability. Wet grip also comes through as a notable strength for around a third of reviewers, helping it feel safe and predictable in poor weather. Comfort and road noise are generally seen as good for a performance tyre, though a smaller but meaningful group find it noisier or less refined than expected. The main recurring downside is vibration or balancing/out-of-round issues mentioned by around one in six owners, with tread life only getting mixed, limited commentary so far.
- Excellent value for money versus premium rivals
- Strong dry grip with lots of confidence
- Sharp, capable dry handling through corners
- Stable and planted at motorway/high speeds
- Vibration/balancing or out-of-round issues at speed
- Can be noisy on some surfaces or at higher speeds
- Tread life concerns from a minority (seems to wear quickly for some)
Summarised by AI from 38 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tyre page.
All 41 Ecsta Sport PS72 reviewsBought them to replace Hankook ventus prime 4 (Touring type of tyres), did a bunch of research before buying, they were really cheap ! So i bought them, you notice the difference in handling and cornering immediately, yes they are UHP and they deliver on that, not that the hankook's were inferior but the Kumhos are a different experience during fast cornering. I drive mainly on mountain passes, they stick like glue on the tarmac they hold well on the wet, haven't drove hard yet on really heavy rain but they seem to do great, no aquaplaning as of now. Sidewalls are not hard as a rock but they aren't soft, they don't deform during cornering, riding on them is nice and comfortable. The only negative as a first impression is this, went from a 68db tyre to a 71db on the highway noise is significant worse with those Kumho, you can feel and hear every imperfection of the road, if you care about the noise buy the version with the foam inside I think they call it K version or something.
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- 83%from 7 reviews
- 71%would buy again
- 34,100 milesdriven by reviewers
Drivers largely praise the Vredestein Ultrac Pro for strong dry and wet grip, confident handling, and notably good ride comfort, with several noting premium feel and value. High-scoring reviews highlight short braking distances, stability, and decent wear for aggressive or heavy vehicles. A minority report concerns include poor performance in very cold (sub-5°C) conditions and one case of premature wear/delamination. Overall, the Ultrac Pro delivers balanced performance with comfort-focused tuning and attractive design.
- dry grip
- wet grip
- handling/steering feel
- ride comfort
- reduced grip in very cold temperatures
Summarised by AI from 6 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tyre page.
All 7 Ultrac Pro reviewsI've had them for two summers and about 10k kms on a Ford Focus ST250. When I was buying them I was looking for good tires at a fair price and these were the newest model available at the time.
Dry: In the dry they have good traction, predictable handlings and good comfort for a UHP tire. Breakaway is communicated well and they don't surprise you out of nowhere. Lift of oversteer is easily achieved and controlled. They do wheelspin a bit in first gear if you are a bit more enthusiastic with the throttle but that's expected on a more powerful fwd car.
Wet: They have good and predictable grip in the wet, good aquaplaning resistance and stop quite well.
Others: Rim guard is somewhere in the middle, not as big as Bridgestone but better than Hankook. Sidewall design is good, comfort and noise are good for a uhp tire. Wear has also been good for me, I expect to change them due to age and not wear but then again I don't do that many miles a year.
It's a tire I like and would recommend. Price to performance is good. Would consider buying. I got their Wintrac Pro Plus to try this winter so I've been satisfied with Vredesteins as a whole.
Sizes, EU label and lineage
From the EU label registrations for each tyre: 86 sizes of the Ecsta Sport PS72 and 98 of the Ultrac Pro, 50 of them made in both.
| Category | Ecsta Sport PS72 | Ultrac Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Season | Summer | Summer |
| Sizes made | 86 sizes, 17 to 21 inch | 98 sizes, 18 to 24 inch |
| Made in both | 50 sizes 205/40 R18215/40 R18215/45 R18225/35 R18225/40 R18225/45 R18235/40 R18235/45 R18245/35 R18245/40 R18245/45 R18255/35 R18and 38 more | |
| EU label wet grip | A95%B5% | A97%B3% |
| EU label rolling resistance | C77%B10%A8%D5% | C73%D18%B6%A3% |
| EU label noise | 70-74 dB B100% | 69-73 dB B97%A3% |
| On the market since | - | 2024 |
| Replaced | Kumho Ecsta PS91 | Vredestein Ultrac Vorti+ (2020) |
| Awards | Winner: Summer Value Performer (17in and above) (WhatTyre, 2026/27) | - |
| Price in the shared tests | The Ultrac Pro was the dearer tyre in 2 of the 3 tests that listed prices, by 5.2% on average. Each test priced the tyres in its own market at the time; only the gap is comparable. | |
Label grades are shown as the share of registered sizes carrying each grade, so "B (88%), C (12%)" means most sizes are B. Grades vary by size; check the label for yours.
Reading the results
Written from the test results and owner reviews above. It is analysis, not a measurement: where it and the tables disagree, the tables are right.
Kumho's Ecsta Sport PS72 and Vredestein's Ultrac Pro sit in the same “max-performance summer” bracket, but the shared test data shows they arrive at performance from very different angles. Across four professional tests spanning sizes from 225/40 R18 to 255/45 R19, the Kumho repeatedly positions itself as the disruptive value pick with strong wet safety metrics and solid all-round pace, while the Vredestein leans into refinement, efficiency and (in some contexts) very high overall ranking.
What makes this head-to-head especially interesting is the variability by test type and fitment: in the 2026 Summer SUV test (255/45 R19) the Ultrac Pro is joint-2nd and impresses as a quiet, low-rolling-resistance all-rounder, yet in the 2025 UHP test (225/40 R18) it finishes last and is criticized for falling behind in key disciplines. The PS72, meanwhile, is consistently competitive and often excellent in wet braking, while also being repeatedly flagged as a price/performance standout.
Conclusion
On pure objective grip and cost efficiency, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 builds the stronger “do-everything fast for the money” case. It wins wet braking in 3 of 4 shared tests-most notably by a large margin in the 2025 UHP test (23.07 m vs 26.82 m) and in the 2026 braking mega-test (27.1 m vs 28.8 m). It also scores well for ownership economics where measured: projected wear is higher in the 2026 Autobild test (48,230 km vs 42,100 km) and its value metric is clearly better (12.44 vs 15.2 price/1000). If you prioritize wet safety margins, durability and purchase price, the PS72 is the more convincing recommendation overall.
The Vredestein Ultrac Pro's strongest argument is refinement and efficiency-especially in larger, SUV-style fitments where it shines overall. It is decisively quieter in the tests that record noise (e.g., 69.1 dB vs 72.9 dB in the SUV test; 71.0 dB vs 74.1 dB in Autobild) and typically has lower rolling resistance (e.g., 6.92 vs 7.62 kg/t in the SUV test). It also tends to edge dry braking in three tests, even if by small margins (typically ~0.2 m). The practical takeaway: choose Ultrac Pro if cabin/drive-by noise and efficiency are top priorities and you're confident the specific size/application aligns with its best showings; otherwise, the PS72 is the safer “high performance per dollar” bet with stronger wet results and better predicted longevity.
Ecsta Sport PS72 vs Ultrac Pro: your questions
Is the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 or the Vredestein Ultrac Pro the better tyre?
In the 4 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 finished ahead 3 times and the Ultrac Pro once. On the Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Ecsta Sport PS72 scores 9.2 and the Ultrac Pro 9 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the Ecsta Sport PS72 or the Ultrac Pro?
The Ecsta Sport PS72 led 10 of the 15 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 5.3% shorter in the wet across 4 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The Ultrac Pro led 5 of the 8 dry measurements the shared tests recorded.
Which lasts longer and costs less to run?
The Ultrac Pro had 3.3% lower rolling resistance (3 tests). Owners rate wear 8.3/10 for the Ecsta Sport PS72 and 6/10 for the Ultrac Pro.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
The Ultrac Pro was 3.5 dB quieter (2 tests). Owners rate comfort 7.7/10 for the Ecsta Sport PS72 and 8.1/10 for the Ultrac Pro.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the Ecsta Sport PS72 84% from 41 reviews and the Ultrac Pro 83% from 7. 82% of Ecsta Sport PS72 owners would buy it again, against 71% for the Ultrac Pro.
Which is more expensive?
In the 3 tests that listed prices, the Ultrac Pro was the dearer tyre in 2 of them, by 5.2% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The Ecsta Sport PS72 is made in 86 sizes (17 to 21 inch) and the Ultrac Pro in 98 (18 to 24 inch). 50 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the Ecsta Sport PS72 is graded A for wet grip and C for rolling resistance in most sizes; the Ultrac Pro A and C.
More comparisons with these tyres
vs
Hankook Ventus Evo vs Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
6-2 in 8 shared tests
vs
Continental SportContact 7 vs Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
1-2 in 3 shared tests
vs
Bridgestone Potenza Sport vs Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
1-1 in 2 shared tests
vs 
Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 vs Michelin Pilot Sport 5
3-3 in 6 shared tests
vs
Continental SportContact 7 vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
7-0 in 7 shared tests
vs
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 vs Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
2-2 in 4 shared tests
vs
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
4-2 in 6 shared tests
vs
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
8-1 in 9 shared tests
Run either of these?
Your review is the part of this page no test can supply: how the tyre wore, how it aged, what it was like in the rain in year three. It takes about five minutes.
Where this data comes from
Finishing positions and measurements are transcribed from each published test. A test only counts here when both tyres ran in it, so every figure was recorded on the same car, size and day as the one it is compared to.
About the TR Score
The Tyre Reviews Score rates each tyre out of 10 from every independent test result and vetted owner review we hold, so two tyres can be compared even before a test has run them together.
Who does the testing
Every test published as a Tyre Reviews test is run by Jonathan Benson, who has been testing tyres independently since 2007.
Discussion