Menu

Vredestein Ultrac vs Kumho Ecsta HS52

2 pneus comparés 6 tests partagés Ete
Vredestein Ultrac
Vredestein Ultrac
Ete · Haute Performance
Tyre Reviews8.5
Tyre Reviews Scoreout of 10
0
Wins
1
Draw
5
Losses
Kumho Ecsta HS52
Kumho Ecsta HS52
Ete · Tourisme Premium
Tyre Reviews9.0
Tyre Reviews Scoreout of 10
5
Wins
1
Draw
0
Losses

Ajuster la pondération des catégories

Modifiez l'importance de chaque catégorie de performance pour observer comment différentes priorités affectent le classement général sur l'ensemble des tests partagés.

Sec 35%
Mouillé 50%
Confort 5%
Valeur 10%
Sec 35% · Mouillé 50% · Confort 5% · Valeur 10%
Affiner les sous-catégories
Sec
Mouillé
Confort
Valeur
RangPneuScoreSecMouilléConfortValeur
1Kumho Ecsta HS5298.5%99.9%97.3%97.4%100%
2Vredestein Ultrac96.2%98.5%99.6%99.7%69.8%

Répartition par catégorie

Analyses détaillées

Dry Braking [M] (lower is better)
Dry Handling [s] (lower is better)
Dry Handling [Km/H] (higher is better)
Subj. Dry Handling [Points] (higher is better)
Wet Braking [M] (lower is better)
Wet Braking - Concrete [M] (lower is better)
Wet Handling [s] (lower is better)
Wet Handling [Km/H] (higher is better)
Subj. Wet Handling [Points] (higher is better)
Wet Circle [s] (lower is better)
Wet Circle [m/s] (higher is better)
Straight Aqua [Km/H] (higher is better)
Curved Aquaplaning [m/sec2] (higher is better)
Subj. Comfort [Points] (higher is better)
Noise [dB] (lower is better)
Wear [KM] (higher is better)
Value [Price/1000] (lower is better)
Value [Price/1000] (lower is better)
Price (lower is better)
Rolling Resistance [kg / t] (lower is better)
Fuel Consumption [l/100km] (lower is better)
Abrasion [mg/km/t] (lower is better)
Bilan victoires/nuls/défaites test par test
RangPneuVictoiresTiragesPertes
1Kumho Ecsta HS52510
2Vredestein Ultrac015
Tests inclus dans cette comparaison