56 Shops · 190,948+ Produkte

Vergleich: Michelin Energy Saver + gegen Kumho Ecsta HS52 gegen Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2

Testprofil

Michelin
Energy Saver +
Kumho
Ecsta HS52
Goodyear
Efficient Grip Performance 2
Anzahl der Tests
4
10
18
Optimale Position
#5
#2
#1
Durchschnittliche Position
10.3
6.0
6.1
Neuester Test
2018
2026
2024
Verfügbare Größen
104
47

Nass

Nass
Michelin Energy Saver +
87%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
77%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
76%
Aquaplaning - quer
Michelin Energy Saver +
62%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
66%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
73%
Aquaplaning - längs
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
73%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
69%
Kreisbahn nass
Michelin Energy Saver +
95%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
89%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
89%
Handling - nass
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
79%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
75%

Kosten

Kosten
Michelin Energy Saver +
80%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
76%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
91%
Kilometerstand
Michelin Energy Saver +
94%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
79%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
100%
Preis-Wert
Michelin Energy Saver +
55%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
97%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
97%
Rollwiderstand
Michelin Energy Saver +
79%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
70%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
84%

Komfort

Komfort
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
77%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
76%
Außengeräusch
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
73%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
75%

Trocken

Trocken
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
87%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
75%
Handling - trocken
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
Kumho Ecsta HS52
85%
Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2
73%

Abmessungen und Preise

Preise in allen verfügbaren reifendimensionen dieser reifen vergleichen.

Zum Vergleich hinzufügen

Beliebte Marken
Neuer Vergleich