I believe that the Kumho Ecsta tested would be the 712 ? if so that is an old pattern and design of tyre, Kumho have replaced most sizes with the KU31 sport and I would be interested to see some honest tests on that.
followed by the Dunlop, followed by
I have just found the results of the test and it was the KU31 , I will get the cost of all the tyres and post it later.
"Usherette! More popcorn for the second row please!"
Wanna Carrot?
Fred ("Fred"
In message , Fred
No, it was the Kumho Ecsta STP KU31.
The Evo review said:
7th Kumho Ecsta STP KU31 A big drop from 6th to the 7th place Kumho and it's all down to feel. In the measured tests the Ecsta STP wasn't far off the pace but our testers didn't warm to it. In the wet it lacked steering feel; in the dry it felt a little twitchy in the fast turns. On the road the ride was good though steering feel was still lacking.All done blind, remember, with the driver not knowing what tyre he was driving. In the dry, the Kumho had the second worst lap time (Dunlop slowest), second lowest lateral G (Pirelli PZero Nero worst) and was subjectively the second worst after the Dunlop. It came mid-field for both wet and dry braking (4th in the dry, 5th in the wet).
For the wet circuit, the Kumho's lap time came in 6th out of 9, beating the Michelin, Dunlop and Yokohama. Wet lateral G was 5th out of 9, subjective judgement was 7th out of 9.
For aquaplaning, 7th out of 9 for straight line, 8th out of 9 for curved.
So basically, middle to lower half of field in terms of lap times on a track, bottom end of the field in terms of how it feels for the driver.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required