Bridgestone Potenza Sport vs Kumho Ecsta PS71
Expect the Potenza Sport to lead in dry grip and steering accuracy, with markedly improved wear versus its predecessors. The Ecsta PS71 impresses with exceptional straight-line aquaplaning resistance, competitive wet braking in some tests, higher comfort, and lower rolling resistance-often at a lower cost per kilometer.
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 four tests which compare both tyres directly!
| Tyre | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Bridgestone Potenza Sport | four |
While it might look like the Bridgestone Potenza Sport is better than the Kumho Ecsta PS71 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
- Class-leading dry braking and handling across tests
- Top-tier wet braking/handling with strong safety reserves
- Significantly better wear and lower abrasion than expected
- Sporty, precise steering feel with stable dynamics
- Outstanding straight-line aquaplaning resistance
- Competitive wet performance in several tests
- Higher comfort and lower rolling resistance
- Strong value/cost per 1000 km
Dry Braking
Looking at data from four tyre tests, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was better during three dry braking tests. On average the Bridgestone Potenza Sport stopped the vehicle in 2.98% less distance than the Kumho Ecsta PS71.
Best In Dry Braking: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [s]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was better during one dry handling [s] tests. On average the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was 2.91% faster around a lap than the Kumho Ecsta PS71.
Best In Dry Handling [s]: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was better during one dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was 1.66% faster around a lap than the Kumho Ecsta PS71.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from four tyre tests, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was better during two wet braking tests. On average the Bridgestone Potenza Sport stopped the vehicle in 2.35% less distance than the Kumho Ecsta PS71.
Best In Wet Braking: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Concrete
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was better during one wet braking - concrete tests. On average the Bridgestone Potenza Sport stopped the vehicle in 3.89% less distance than the Kumho Ecsta PS71.
Best In Wet Braking - Concrete: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
See how the Wet Braking - Concrete winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [s]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was better during one wet handling [s] tests. On average the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was 5.64% faster around a wet lap than the Kumho Ecsta PS71.
Best In Wet Handling [s]: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 was better during one wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta PS71 was 0.41% faster around a wet lap than the Bridgestone Potenza Sport.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Kumho Ecsta PS71
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was better during one wet circle tests. On average the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was 1.22% faster around a wet circle than the Kumho Ecsta PS71.
Best In Wet Circle: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 was better during three straight aqua tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta PS71 floated at a 4% higher speed than the Bridgestone Potenza Sport.
Best In Straight Aqua: Kumho Ecsta PS71
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 was better during two curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta PS71 slipped out at a 3.68% higher speed than the Bridgestone Potenza Sport.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Kumho Ecsta PS71
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Subj. Comfort
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 was better during two subj. comfort tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta PS71 scored 8.89% more points than the Bridgestone Potenza Sport.
Best In Subj. Comfort: Kumho Ecsta PS71
See how the Subj. Comfort winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was better during two noise tests. On average the Bridgestone Potenza Sport measured 0.44% quieter than the Kumho Ecsta PS71.
Best In Noise: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was better during two wear tests. On average the Bridgestone Potenza Sport is predicted to cover 17.53% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the Kumho Ecsta PS71.
Best In Wear: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Value
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was better during one value tests. On average the Bridgestone Potenza Sport proved to have a 3.13% better value based on price/1000km than the Kumho Ecsta PS71.
Best In Value: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
See how the Value winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 was better during two rolling resistance tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta PS71 had a 5.42% lower rolling resistance than the Bridgestone Potenza Sport.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Kumho Ecsta PS71
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Fuel Consumption
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta PS71 was better during one fuel consumption tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta PS71 used 1.72% less fuel than the Bridgestone Potenza Sport.
Best In Fuel Consumption: Kumho Ecsta PS71
See how the Fuel Consumption winner was calculated >>
Abrasion
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was better during one abrasion tests. On average the Bridgestone Potenza Sport emitted 25.55% less particle wear matter than the Kumho Ecsta PS71.
Best In Abrasion: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
See how the Abrasion winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Bridgestone Potenza Sport Driver Reviews
Across 115 reviews, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport is praised for exceptional dry and wet grip, sharp steering response, strong braking, and confidence-inspiring handling, often rivaling or beating PS4/PS4S and PZ4. Many note it performs best when warmed and can be superb for spirited road use, with some citing good value. The most common drawbacks are rapid tread wear, higher noise and a firm ride, noticeable grip drop when cold, and poor durability on track abuse; a few also report slightly higher fuel consumption. Overall sentiment is strongly positive for performance-focused drivers, with caveats on longevity and comfort.
Based on 120 reviews with an average rating of 80%
Kumho Ecsta PS71 Driver Reviews
Most drivers rate the Kumho Ecsta PS71 positively for strong wet and dry grip, predictable handling, and good value, often comparing it favorably to pricier premium options. Noise and faster wear appear as the main trade-offs, with several reports of increased road noise over time and below-average tread life for some vehicles. A minority report balancing/'egg-shaped' defects and tramlining, but these are not universal. Overall, the PS71 is a well-liked mid-range UHP tyre focused on grip and value.
Based on 82 reviews with an average rating of 78%
I've always used kumho because the price well reflects in proformance if only they didn't need constant rebalencing.
I've had 4 duff pairs, ku31 x 2 pair, ku 39 x 2 pair that had to come off in the end they were so bad.
No amount of balencing can sort an egg shape tyre.
These new ps71 are very soft, squishy, feel like running on 20psi with 30g wheel wobble even after twice rebalencing them & 1 of them is egg shape.
I am worn out with trying to get them right & think after years of kumho on... Continue reading this review using the link below
Conclusion
The Ecsta PS71's edge is stability in deep water, lower rolling resistance, higher subjective comfort, and compelling price-performance. Its weakness remains consistency on dry roads and ultimate wet grip versus the Bridgestone, which ADAC highlighted. If you prioritize aquaplaning security, comfort and cost efficiency over razor-sharp dynamics, the Kumho is the sensible pick; for maximum grip, feedback and all-round speed with improved longevity, choose the Bridgestone.
Key Differences
- Bridgestone delivers shorter dry stops (e.g., 32.6 m vs 34.2 m) and faster dry handling; Kumho trails here.
- Wet grip favors Bridgestone overall, though Kumho occasionally matches or edges it in specific wet metrics.
- Aquaplaning: Kumho consistently superior in straight aquaplaning; Bridgestone slightly better in curved in some tests.
- Wear/longevity: Bridgestone markedly better (e.g., 50,500 km vs 37,300 km in ADAC).
- Efficiency/rolling resistance: Kumho lower RR and marginally better fuel use.
- Comfort/noise: Kumho higher subjective comfort; Bridgestone marginally quieter in some measurements.
Overall Winner: Bridgestone Potenza Sport
Based on the tyre test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport 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:
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.