Menu

Vredestein Ultrac vs Kumho Ecsta HS52

2 däck jämförda 6 delade tester Sommar
Vredestein Ultrac
Vredestein Ultrac
Sommar · Hög prestanda
Tyre Reviews8.5
Tyre Reviews Scoreout of 10
0
Wins
1
Draw
5
Losses
Kumho Ecsta HS52
Kumho Ecsta HS52
Sommar · Premium Touring
Tyre Reviews9.0
Tyre Reviews Scoreout of 10
5
Wins
1
Draw
0
Losses

Justera kategoriviktning

Justera vikten av varje prestationskategori för att se hur olika prioriteringar påverkar den övergripande rankningen för alla delade tester.

Torka 35%
Våt 50%
Bekvämlighet 5%
Värde 10%
Torka 35% · Våt 50% · Bekvämlighet 5% · Värde 10%
Finjustera underkategorier
Torka
Våt
Bekvämlighet
Värde
RangTröttaGöraTorkaVåtBekvämlighetVärde
1Kumho Ecsta HS5298.5%99.9%97.3%97.4%100%
2Vredestein Ultrac96.2%98.5%99.6%99.7%69.8%

Kategorifördelning

Detaljerade uppdelningar

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)
Test för test, vinst/oavgjort/förlustresultat
RangTröttaVinsterDragarFörluster
1Kumho Ecsta HS52510
2Vredestein Ultrac015
Tester som ingår i denna jämförelse