Bridgestone Turanza 6 vs Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
Across the two shared 2026 tests, the pattern is consistent: the Kumho repeatedly outperforms the Bridgestone on outright dry and wet grip (braking and handling), while the Bridgestone answers back with clearly stronger aquaplaning security, better subjective comfort, and a very large rolling-resistance advantage. The choice comes down to whether your priority is “grip and response” or “efficiency, ease and hydroplaning margin.”
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 PS72 | one | |
| one draws in one tests | ||
While it might look like the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 is better than the Bridgestone Turanza 6 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
- Best-in-comparison (and described as best-in-test) rolling resistance/efficiency: ~20-21% lower rolling resistance than PS72 (0.632 vs 0.804 kg/t; 6.46 vs 8.14 kg/t)
- Stronger aquaplaning security in both tests (straight ~72.2 vs 71.4 km/h; curved 3.59 vs 3.32 m/s²)
- Better subjective comfort in both tests (6.2 vs 6.1; 6.6 vs 6.1) and a more touring-friendly demeanour
- Generally predictable, stable behaviour (touring-focused), making it an easy tyre to live with for daily commuting
- Consistently higher dry grip and faster dry handling (74.2 vs 76.2 s; 73.15 vs 74.91 s) with stronger subjective dry scores (7.4 vs 6.3; 8.4 vs 8.0)
- Clear wet-performance advantage in braking and handling (wet braking 44.3 vs 46.1 m; 28.38 vs 29.47 m and wet handling 71.0 vs 75.2 s; 70.46 vs 72.65 s)
- Higher lateral wet grip/wet circle results in both tests (0.761 vs 0.709; 12.22 vs 12.74 s)
- Sporty, confidence-inspiring steering and predictability highlighted in test notes, aligning with its max-performance positioning
Dry Braking
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 was better during two dry braking tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 stopped the vehicle in 0.85% less distance than the Bridgestone Turanza 6.
Best In Dry Braking: Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [s]
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 was better during two dry handling [s] tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 was 2.49% faster around a lap than the Bridgestone Turanza 6.
Best In Dry Handling [s]: Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Dry Handling
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 was better during two subj. dry handling tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 scored 9.49% more points than the Bridgestone Turanza 6.
Best In Subj. Dry Handling: Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
See how the Subj. Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 was better during two wet braking tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 stopped the vehicle in 3.84% less distance than the Bridgestone Turanza 6.
Best In Wet Braking: Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [s]
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 was better during two wet handling [s] tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 was 4.33% faster around a wet lap than the Bridgestone Turanza 6.
Best In Wet Handling [s]: Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Wet Handling
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 was better during one subj. wet handling tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 scored 10.84% more points than the Bridgestone Turanza 6.
Best In Subj. Wet Handling: Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
See how the Subj. Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 was better during one wet circle tests. On average the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 had 6.58% higher lateral wet grip than the Bridgestone Turanza 6.
Best In Wet Circle: Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Bridgestone Turanza 6 was better during two straight aqua tests. On average the Bridgestone Turanza 6 floated at a 1.11% higher speed than the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72.
Best In Straight Aqua: Bridgestone Turanza 6
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Bridgestone Turanza 6 was better during two curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Bridgestone Turanza 6 slipped out at a 7.52% higher speed than the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Bridgestone Turanza 6
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Subj. Comfort
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Bridgestone Turanza 6 was better during two subj. comfort tests. On average the Bridgestone Turanza 6 scored 4.69% more points than the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72.
Best In Subj. Comfort: Bridgestone Turanza 6
See how the Subj. Comfort winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Bridgestone Turanza 6 and Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 performed equally well in noise tests.
Best In Noise: Both tyres performed equally well
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Bridgestone Turanza 6 was better during two rolling resistance tests. On average the Bridgestone Turanza 6 had a 20.58% lower rolling resistance than the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Bridgestone Turanza 6
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Bridgestone Turanza 6 Driver Reviews
Most drivers rate the Bridgestone Turanza 6 highly for its excellent wet grip and braking, very low noise levels, comfortable ride, and improved fuel economy, often noting strong aquaplaning resistance and confidence in heavy rain. Dry grip is generally good for a touring tyre, but the softer sidewalls can make steering feel less precise, with some reports of floatiness, understeer, and reduced feedback at higher speeds. A minority mention faster or uneven wear and occasional noise increase over time, but these are not dominant trends. Overall, the Turanza 6 suits drivers prioritizing comfort, quietness, and wet-weather security over sporty handling feel.
Based on 52 reviews with an average rating of 79%
Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 Driver Reviews
Drivers generally report the Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72 delivers strong dry and wet grip with confident, predictable handling and very good steering precision for the price. Many describe it as comparable to premium options (e.g., Michelin Pilot Sport and Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric lines) while offering standout value. Noise and comfort are often rated as good to very good, though a minority note it can be a bit firm or road-noisy depending on car/road. The main recurring complaint is vibration/balancing problems (often described as out-of-round tyres) on some sets, which can undermine an otherwise very positive experience.
Based on 27 reviews with an average rating of 84%
They are not loud, but wouldn't they are necessarily quiet. You can hear them a bit depending on the road surface and speed.
Didn’t drive them too much in the rain, but seem to hold pretty well in wet conditions.
Mounted them in march this year and after 10-15k km I don’t see any major wear, but I would have to abstain on this one until I get them properly... Continue reading this review using the link below
Conclusion
The Bridgestone Turanza 6, however, is meaningfully stronger in the areas that matter for relaxed, high-mileage use: it dominates rolling resistance by roughly ~20-21% in both tests (0.632 vs 0.804 kg/t; 6.46 vs 8.14 kg/t), and it's consistently better in aquaplaning (straight: ~72.2 vs 71.4 km/h; curved: 3.59 vs 3.32 m/s²). It also edges comfort and is generally described as stable and predictable-just not very “grippy,” especially in the wet where testers noted a lack of bite and some hydroplaning moments.
Practical takeaway: pick the Kumho if you want performance-first wet/dry grip and a sportier feel; pick the Bridgestone if your priorities are fuel/EV range, refinement, and extra hydroplaning margin in heavy rain-accepting that it gives up noticeable wet-handling pace and overall grip for that efficiency.
Key Differences
- Overall intent: Turanza 6 is touring/efficiency-led; PS72 is performance/grip-led-and the test data strongly reflects that split
- Wet safety via grip: PS72 repeatedly stops shorter in the wet (e.g., 44.3 m vs 46.1 m; 28.38 m vs 29.47 m) and is quicker in wet handling (71.0 vs 75.2 s; 70.46 vs 72.65 s)
- Dry dynamics: PS72 is consistently quicker in dry handling (by ~2.35-2.62%) and scores higher subjectively for engagement/precision
- Aquaplaning trade-off: Turanza 6 is better in straight and curved aquaplaning in both shared tests (small but consistent straight advantage; sizable curved advantage ~8%)
- Running costs/efficiency: Turanza 6 has a large rolling-resistance advantage (~20-21%), likely translating to better fuel economy/EV range, while PS72 is described as poor in this area
- Ride focus: Turanza 6 scores higher for comfort and is more touring-oriented; PS72 is lower on comfort and more performance-biased in feel
Overall Winner: Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72
Based on the tyre test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Kumho Ecsta Sport 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:
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.