Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- TR Score
- 9.3/10
- Owners say
- 83% · 9
- TR Score
- 9.4/10
- Owners say
- 85% · 180
The Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 and the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S have met in 3 independent tests and the record is level at 1-1. The Ecsta Sport S PS72 stopped 5.6% shorter in the wet; the Pilot Sport 4 S lapped the dry handling course 0.8% faster.
Data updated
Which should you buy?
For drivers who prioritise sharp dry-road handling and OE-style steering accuracy (spirited driving/track days), the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S is the pick. For most road users-especially those who drive in the wet, want shorter stopping distances and a quieter/more comfortable ride at a far better price-to-performance ratio-the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 is the smarter overall choice.
Where the Ecsta Sport S PS72 is stronger
- Consistently shorter wet braking across all shared tests (e.g., 22.64 m vs 24.64 m; 40.4 m vs 43.9 m)
- Strong real-world value: competitive performance while typically priced far below premium options (explicitly cheapest in Autobild)
- Good wet handling and controllability in objective tests (wins in wet handling and wet circle in Autobild and Tire Rack)
Where the Pilot Sport 4 S is stronger
- Best-in-class dry handling precision across the dataset (wins dry handling in all three shared tests)
- Strong subjective dry dynamics and consistent lap performance in AutoView (noted steering linearity and repeatability; fastest lap 1:25.95)
- Better efficiency in measured rolling resistance (8.5 vs 9.65 kg/t in Autobild)
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 S PS72 vs Pilot Sport 4 S at a glance
| Category | Ecsta Sport S PS72 | Gap | Pilot Sport 4 S |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared tests won3 shared tests | 1 | 1 level | 1 |
| Dry10 measurements | 4 | The Pilot Sport 4 S lapped the dry handling course 0.8% faster (2 tests) | 6 |
| Wet9 measurements | 8 | The Ecsta Sport S PS72 stopped 5.6% shorter in the wet (3 tests) | 1 |
| Comfort4 measurements | 2 | Level between the two. | 2 |
| Value1 measurement | 0 | 1 | |
| Tyre Reviews Scoreevery test and review we hold | 9.3/10 | The Pilot Sport 4 S by 0.1 | 9.4/10 |
| Owner rating9 and 180 reviews | 83% | The Pilot Sport 4 S by 2 points | 85% |
| Would buy againshare of owners | 78% | The Pilot Sport 4 S by 2 points | 80% |
| Sizes madeEU label registrations | 60 | 48 sizes made in both | 105 |
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 3 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 S PS72 | Field | Pilot Sport 4 S |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 Autobild Sports Cars Summer Tyre Test | P5 of 8 | P5 of 8 | |
| 2025 AutoView Sports Tyre Test | P3 of 5 | P1 of 5 | |
| 2025 Tire Rack UUHP Summer Tyre Test | P1 of 10 | P5 of 10 |
Performance profile
6 measurements from the 3 shared tests, each tyre shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
Ecsta Sport S PS72
Pilot Sport 4 S
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. 10 measurements recorded in only one shared test are left off; every measurement is in the table further down.
Where each scores higher
Ecsta Sport S PS72
Pilot Sport 4 S
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 S PS72
Pilot Sport 4 S
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
Owners rate the Ecsta Sport S PS72 83% from 9 reviews and the Pilot Sport 4 S 85% from 180. 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 S PS72 | Gap | Pilot Sport 4 S | Wins | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 33.63 | 1.4% | 34.16 | 2-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 57.87 | 0.8% | 57.29 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 106.1 | 1.7% | 107.9 | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 4.7% | scored | 1-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 0.98 | 2% | 1 | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 10.6% | scored | 1-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 36.68 | 5.6% | 38.61 | 3-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 30.52 | 2.1% | 31.18 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 72 | 1.1% | 71.2 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 8.4% | scored | 1-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 0.88 | 3.5% | 0.85 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 14 | 2.1% | 14.3 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 88.3 | 2.2% | 90.2 | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 3.3% | scored | 1-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 67.8 | 0.2 dB | 67.65 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 9.65 | 11.9% | 8.5 | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
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 S PS72 scores 9.3 and the Pilot Sport 4 S 9.4 out of 10.
| Ecsta Sport S PS72 | Category | Pilot Sport 4 S | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 94 | Dry | 97 | ||
| 95 | Wet | 89 | ||
| 32 | Comfort | 44 | ||
| 12 | Value | 32 | ||
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 S PS72 | Category | Pilot Sport 4 S | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9.4 | Dry Grip | 9.2 | ||
| 8.8 | Wet Grip | 8.7 | ||
| 8.8 | Road Feedback | 8.4 | ||
| 9.6 | Handling | 8.6 | ||
| 4.8 | Wear | 8 | ||
| 6.7 | Comfort | 8.4 | ||
Owners rate the Ecsta Sport S PS72 83% from 9 reviews and the Pilot Sport 4 S 85% from 180. Reviews are vetted by hand before publication; ownership is not verified.
Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
- 83%from 9 reviews
- 78%would buy again
- 25,350 milesdriven by reviewers
Drivers report the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 delivers strong, sporty performance with high confidence dry and wet grip, quick/precise steering response, and good feedback-often comparing it favorably to more expensive premium options for the price. Most reviews also praise its value for money and stable handling, helped by a notably stiff sidewall. Minority drawbacks center on a firmer ride/comfort trade-off from the stiff construction and some reports of slightly higher road noise versus competitors.
- Strong dry grip/traction
- Very good wet grip and confidence in rain
- Precise handling, steering response, and road feedback
- Excellent value for money versus premium competitors
- Firmer ride/less comfort due to very stiff sidewalls (especially when cold)
- Slightly higher road noise than some competitors
Summarised by AI from 9 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tyre page.
All 9 Ecsta Sport S PS72 reviewsKumho's feel very sporty and grippy, as they should. Sidewall is quite stiff for a road tire. Dry grip is awesome and should be more than enough for normal driving in traffic, even for spirited drivers. Wet grip also very good, I've never had any issues in the rain with these. (Yes, they are new tires.) Only downside is road noise which is not their best quality, but noise is not very loud, maybe average in their class.
Car came with almost new Minerva F205's and Kumho's beat these in every category hands on. Kumho is excellent tire and I highly recommend this. True value for money as they are cheaper than competitors (Michelin, Continental, etc) but offer same quality and driving characteristics.
I mostly drive city traffic and motorway in mixed conditions sun or rain.
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- 85%from 180 reviews
- 80%would buy again
- 2,122,714 milesdriven by reviewers
Owners broadly agree the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S delivers standout dry and wet grip, with over half mentioning strong dry traction and nearly half praising its wet confidence. Comfort is also a common plus for a max-performance tyre, though noise is more mixed, with a noticeable minority finding it loud. Longevity gets a more divided reception: many report solid tread life, but around one in eight complain about faster wear or uneven wear, and a smaller group say performance drops off as it wears. A further recurring criticism is a soft sidewall feel, with around one in ten owners reporting less support or precision than expected.
- Excellent dry grip and traction
- Very strong wet grip and confidence in the rain
- Comfortable ride for a performance tyre
- Stable, confidence-inspiring dry handling
- Noticeable road noise at certain speeds or on coarse surfaces
- Soft sidewalls can feel less supportive or precise
- Tread life can be shorter than expected for some drivers
Summarised by AI from 154 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tyre page.
All 180 Pilot Sport 4 S reviewsThe wet and dry grip has been exceptional with low road noise and moderate harshness. Handling precision and responsiveness have been good, not exceptional. The tires have held inflation pressure very well with minimal leakage. This is my second set and unless Michelin comes out with a better max performance summer tire, I'll buy them again.
Sizes, EU label and lineage
From the EU label registrations for each tyre: 60 sizes of the Ecsta Sport S PS72 and 105 of the Pilot Sport 4 S, 48 of them made in both.
| Category | Ecsta Sport S PS72 | Pilot Sport 4 S |
|---|---|---|
| Season | Summer | Summer |
| Sizes made | 60 sizes, 18 to 22 inch | 105 sizes, 17 to 22 inch |
| Made in both | 48 sizes 225/40 R18225/35 R19225/40 R19235/35 R19245/30 R19245/35 R19245/40 R19255/30 R19255/35 R19255/40 R19265/30 R19265/35 R19and 36 more | |
| EU label wet grip | A100% | A84%B11%C2%D2% |
| EU label rolling resistance | C79%D21% | C55%D45% |
| EU label noise | 71-75 dB B100% | 70-75 dB B100% |
| On the market since | 2024 | 2016 |
| Replaced | Kumho Ecsta PS71 (2016) | Michelin Pilot Super Sport (2010) |
| Replaced by | - | Michelin Pilot Sport S 5 |
| Awards | - | Winner: Best Tyres for High Performance Cars (DriverReviews, 2026/27) Winner: Best Tyres for High Performance Cars (DriverReviews, 2024/25) |
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.
This is a particularly revealing head-to-head because both tyres sit in the same max-performance summer category, yet they represent two different eras and philosophies. The Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S is the established premium/OE benchmark-tuned for sharp, linear steering and repeatable dry-lap consistency-while the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 is a newer challenger aiming to match (or beat) the big names with a more value-led proposition.
Across three shared, recent tests in 19-inch fitments (255/35R19 and 275/35R19), the pattern is consistent: Michelin tends to win on outright dry handling precision and lap-time capability, while Kumho repeatedly takes the meaningful safety and real-world categories in the wet-especially braking-and often does so with a refinement advantage. The result is less “premium wins everywhere” and more a genuine trade-off depending on whether you prioritise dry-track feel or everyday wet-road confidence and value.
Conclusion
If your priority is dry-road handling fidelity-fast, repeatable laps, clean turn-in and a premium OE-style steering line-the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S still makes a strong case. It won AutoView overall (97.5 vs 92.1 points) and was fastest on lap time (1:25.95), and it swept dry handling wins across all three shared tests (e.g., 85.95s vs 86.98s in AutoView; 107.9 vs 106.1 km/h in Autobild; 28.62s vs 28.75s in Tire Rack). Michelin also adds clear efficiency benefits, beating Kumho on rolling resistance (8.5 vs 9.65 kg/t in Autobild) and leading straight-line aquaplaning in that test (90.2 vs 88.3 km/h).
But as an all-rounder for public roads, the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 comes out as the more compelling buy in this dataset-especially in wet safety metrics and price-to-performance. It won wet braking in all three shared tests, including a large gap in Tire Rack (40.4 m vs 43.9 m) and AutoView (22.64 m vs 24.64 m), and it beat Michelin on wet handling in the two tests that reported it (Autobild and Tire Rack). It also regularly looks like the more comfortable/refined option in practice (best Tire Rack “road score” 7.83 vs 7.08; Autobild comfort 8 vs 7.3), while Michelin is repeatedly flagged for being expensive relative to the results (notably ~€1020/set in Autobild) and for wet-performance shortcomings and balance quirks (front-to-rear aquaplaning imbalance).
Practical takeaway: choose the Michelin if you're chasing dry-limit precision and don't mind paying for that OE-calibrated feel; choose the Kumho if you want a modern, confidence-inspiring tyre in the wet with strong refinement and far stronger value-without giving up much dry performance in the real world.
Ecsta Sport S PS72 vs Pilot Sport 4 S: your questions
Is the Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 or the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S the better tyre?
The Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 and the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S have met in 3 independent tests and the record is level at 1-1. On the Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Ecsta Sport S PS72 scores 9.3 and the Pilot Sport 4 S 9.4 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the Ecsta Sport S PS72 or the Pilot Sport 4 S?
The Ecsta Sport S PS72 led 8 of the 9 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 5.6% shorter in the wet across 3 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The Pilot Sport 4 S led 6 of the 10 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it lapped the dry handling course 0.8% faster across 2 tests.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 6.7/10 for the Ecsta Sport S PS72 and 8.4/10 for the Pilot Sport 4 S.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the Ecsta Sport S PS72 83% from 9 reviews and the Pilot Sport 4 S 85% from 180. 78% of Ecsta Sport S PS72 owners would buy it again, against 80% for the Pilot Sport 4 S.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The Ecsta Sport S PS72 is made in 60 sizes (18 to 22 inch) and the Pilot Sport 4 S in 105 (17 to 22 inch). 48 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the Ecsta Sport S PS72 is graded A for wet grip and C for rolling resistance in most sizes; the Pilot Sport 4 S A and C.
Which is the newer tyre?
The Ecsta Sport S PS72 is the newer design: it reached the market in 2024, the Pilot Sport 4 S in 2016. The Ecsta Sport S PS72 replaced the Kumho Ecsta PS71. The Pilot Sport 4 S replaced the Michelin Pilot Super Sport.
More comparisons with these tyres
vs
Continental SportContact 7 vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
9-2 in 12 shared tests
vs 
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs Pirelli P Zero PZ4
8-1 in 9 shared tests
vs
Bridgestone Potenza Sport vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
2-8 in 10 shared tests
vs 
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs Pirelli P Zero PZ5
2-2 in 4 shared tests
vs
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
3-0 in 4 shared tests
vs
Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
2-11 in 13 shared tests
vs
Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
1-1 in 2 shared tests
vs
Continental SportContact 7 vs Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72
3-0 in 3 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