Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
Across two shared, reputable comparisons (Auto Bild Sportscars 2026 in 255/35 R19 and Tire Rack's 2025 UUHP test in 275/35 R19), the pattern is clear: Michelin tends to retain an edge in pure dry pace metrics, but Kumho repeatedly outperforms it in wet braking and wet handling-and does so while also scoring higher for ride/road refinement in the Tire Rack-style subjective assessments. The surprise is not that the Michelin is fast, but that the Kumho is often the more complete real-world tyre, especially when the weather turns.
Test Results
Independent comparison tyre tests are the best source of data to get tyre information from, and the good news is there have been two tests which compare both tyres directly!
| Tyre | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 | one | |
| one draws in one tests | ||
While it might look like the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 is better than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S purely based on the higher number of test wins, tyres are very complicated objects which means where one tyre is better than the other can be more important in real world use.
Let's look at how the two tyres compare across multiple tyre test categories.
Key Strengths
- Consistently stronger wet braking and wet handling across both tests (e.g., 40.4 m vs 43.9 m wet braking in Tire Rack; 72.0 vs 71.2 km/h wet handling in Auto Bild)
- Balanced wet grip on circle/skidpad metrics (wins wet circle in both tests: 14.0 vs 14.3 s in Auto Bild; higher wet circle result in Tire Rack)
- Higher subjective refinement/road comfort impressions (Auto Bild comfort 8.0 vs 7.3; Tire Rack road score 7.83 vs 7.08)
- Outstanding value positioning in the professional commentary (noted as the cheapest in Auto Bild with no meaningful safety compromises)
- Dry handling advantage in both tests (107.9 vs 106.1 km/h in Auto Bild; 28.62 vs 28.75 s in Tire Rack)
- Slight edge in ultimate dry grip metrics in Tire Rack (1.00 g vs 0.98 g on dry circle; and best dry braking there at 31.4 vs 32.1 m)
- Better rolling resistance in Auto Bild (8.5 vs 9.65 kg/t), supporting fuel economy/EV-style efficiency priorities
- Best straight-line aquaplaning (front axle) in Auto Bild (90.2 vs 88.3 km/h)
Dry Braking
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one dry braking tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 stopped the vehicle in 0.3% less distance than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Dry Braking: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [s]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was better during one dry handling [s] tests. On average the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was 0.45% faster around a lap than the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72.
Best In Dry Handling [s]: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was better during one dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was 1.67% faster around a lap than the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Dry Circle
Best In Dry Circle: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Dry Circle winner was calculated >>
Subj. Road Score
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one subj. road score tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 scored 9.58% more points than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Subj. Road Score: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Subj. Road Score winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during two wet braking tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 stopped the vehicle in 4.17% less distance than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Wet Braking: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [s]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one wet handling [s] tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was 2.12% faster around a wet lap than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Wet Handling [s]: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was 1.11% faster around a wet lap than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Wet Handling
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one subj. wet handling tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 scored 7.75% more points than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Subj. Wet Handling: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Subj. Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one wet circle tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was 2.1% faster around a wet circle than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Wet Circle: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was better during one straight aqua tests. On average the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S floated at a 2.11% higher speed than the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72.
Best In Straight Aqua: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Subj. Comfort
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 was better during one subj. comfort tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 scored 8.75% more points than the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S.
Best In Subj. Comfort: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
See how the Subj. Comfort winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was better during one noise tests. On average the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S measured 1.09% quieter than the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72.
Best In Noise: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S was better during one rolling resistance tests. On average the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S had a 11.92% lower rolling resistance than the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 Driver Reviews
Drivers report the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 delivers very high grip and confidence in both wet and dry conditions, with strong steering response/feedback and a standout price-to-performance ratio versus premium competitors. Most reviews describe road noise as acceptable (sometimes slightly higher than rivals) and praise the tyre's sporty, stiff sidewalls for precision. The main recurring downside is comfort/ride harshness from the stiff construction, and a minority of users report faster-than-expected tread wear compared with tyres like the Michelin Pilot Sport 4S.
Based on 8 reviews with an average rating of 79%
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S Driver Reviews
Across the reviews, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S is most often described as a top-tier UHP summer tyre with standout dry and wet grip, strong braking, and high confidence at speed. Many drivers also report surprisingly good comfort for the category and, in higher-scoring reviews, better-than-expected tread life. The most consistent drawbacks are high price and a recurring complaint of softer sidewalls leading to less sharp turn-in/steering feel for some vehicles and driving styles; several also note higher noise on coarse surfaces or as the tyre ages. As expected for a max-performance summer tyre, multiple reviewers warn it is unsafe in snow/ice.
Based on 157 reviews with an average rating of 85%
Conclusion
But the more decision-driving story is the wet performance and overall usability: the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 dominates wet braking and wet handling in both tests-most notably in Tire Rack wet braking (40.4 m vs 43.9 m, ~8% shorter) and wet lap time (30.52 s vs 31.18 s). Auto Bild also highlights Michelin's front-to-rear aquaplaning imbalance, while describing the Kumho as having “no serious weaknesses” and being a safe, sensible performer for the money. Combine that with the Kumho's strong subjective road/comfort scores and its markedly better value (Michelin cited at ~€1020 per set in Auto Bild), and the practical takeaway is simple: unless you're specifically chasing that last slice of dry-lap precision (and are happy paying for it), the PS72 looks like the smarter all-round buy-particularly for drivers who see regular wet roads.
Key Differences
- Wet stopping power is the biggest real-world separator: Kumho is substantially shorter in Tire Rack wet braking (40.4 m vs 43.9 m), while Michelin never wins wet braking in the shared data.
- Michelin is more consistently quick on a dry handling course (wins 2/2 dry handling categories), but the margins are relatively small (e.g., 0.45% in Tire Rack).
- Aquaplaning behavior differs: Michelin leads straight aquaplaning speed on the front axle (90.2 km/h) but is noted for a large front-to-rear imbalance; Kumho is slightly lower in the straight-aqua metric but stronger in wet circuit-style measures.
- Refinement/value tilts strongly to Kumho: higher comfort/road scores and strong test commentary about composure, plus budget pricing vs Michelin's premium cost (Auto Bild cites ~€1020 per set for PS4S).
- Efficiency favors Michelin in the available lab metric: rolling resistance is meaningfully better (8.5 vs 9.65 kg/t), which can matter for running costs.
- Noise results are mixed by source/context: Auto Bild's measured noise slightly favors Michelin (72.6 vs 73.4 dB), while Tire Rack's qualitative notes criticize Michelin for elevated noise and praise Kumho's refinement.
Overall Winner: Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
Based on the tyre test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 has demonstrated better overall performance in this comparison. However, as you can see from the spider diagram above, each tyre has its own strengths which should be considered in your final tyre buying choice.Similar Comparisons
Looking for more tyre comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tyres:
Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 Top Comparisons
No other comparisons available for this tyre.
Footnote
This page has been developed using tyre industry testing best practices. This means we are only comparing tests which have had both tyres in the same test.
Why is this important? Tyre testing is heavily affected by things like surface grip levels and surface temperature, which means you can only compare values from the same day. During a tyre test external condition changes are calculated into the overall results, but it is not possible to calculate this between tyre tests performed on different days or at different locations.
As a result you will see other tests on Tyre Reviews which feature both the %s and %s, but as they weren't conducted on the same day, the results are not comparable.
Lots of other websites do this sort of tyre comparison, Tyre Reviews doesn't.
Discussion
- No comments yet — be the first.