75
/ 100
Objective (60%)
–/100
No test data yet
User signal (40%)
75/100
27 owner reviews
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
Head-to-head
Updated May 2026
Kumho Ecsta HM KH31 vs Yokohama Advan dB V552 — Compared (May 2026)
Our Relative Score blends 60% objective test data with 40% owner-review signal — so any two tires can be compared even if they were never tested on the same day.
VS
70
/ 100
Objective (60%)
–/100
No test data yet
User signal (40%)
69/100
12 owner reviews
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
VerdictWinner: Kumho Ecsta HM KH31 — better dry, wet and treadwear. Pick the Yokohama Advan dB V552 if comfort matters most to you.
Read full
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made via links on this page.
Category breakdown
5 categories, side by side
Each bar is the Relative Score for that category. Expand a tile to see the test results and owner ratings behind it.
Dry
Score (0–100)
Ecsta HM KH31 leads by 9
Why this score
| Source | Ecsta HM KH31 | Advan dB V552 |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | 81 | 72 |
Wet
Score (0–100)
Ecsta HM KH31 leads by 7
Why this score
| Source | Ecsta HM KH31 | Advan dB V552 |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | 73 | 66 |
Comfort
Score (0–100)
Advan dB V552 leads by 6
Why this score
| Source | Ecsta HM KH31 | Advan dB V552 |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | 78 | 84 |
Treadwear
Score (0–100)
Ecsta HM KH31 leads by 7
Why this score
| Source | Ecsta HM KH31 | Advan dB V552 |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | 72 | 65 |
Handling
Score (0–100)
Ecsta HM KH31 leads by 6
Why this score
| Source | Ecsta HM KH31 | Advan dB V552 |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | 74 | 68 |
| DriverReviews owners | – | 80 |
Scores at a glance
| Category | Kumho Ecsta HM KH31 | Yokohama Advan dB V552 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 75 | 70 |
| Dry | 81 | 72 |
| Wet | 73 | 66 |
| Comfort | 78 | 84 |
| Treadwear | 72 | 65 |
| Handling | 74 | 68 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Personalize
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip and treadwear start at “Important” — the two things buyers rank highest. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Recomputed
Headline score
75
/ 100
Tire A
70
/ 100
Tire B
From owners
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews across retailers and review sites — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
The Kumho Ecsta HM KH31 is widely regarded as a high-value tire that offers a compelling balance of comfort, low noise, and reliable grip for daily driving. While the majority of users praise its performance-to-price ratio, there is a notable divide in user experience, with some reporting exceptional longevity and handling, while others cite inconsistent wet-weather performance and premature wear.
Pros
- Excellent value for money compared to premium brands
- Low road noise and high levels of ride comfort
- Strong dry-weather handling and cornering confidence
- Good longevity for many users under varied driving conditions
Cons
- Inconsistent wet-weather grip reported by some users
- Reports of premature or uneven tread wear on certain vehicles
- Occasional complaints regarding sidewall durability and road hazard susceptibility
- Subjective 'plastic' feel or lack of steering feedback for performance-oriented drivers
Observations
- Users with smaller, performance-oriented hatchbacks (e.g., Peugeot 106 GTI) found the tire to be an excellent, cost-effective solution for awkward wheel sizes.
- Drivers of heavier vehicles and MPVs reported high satisfaction with the tire's ability to maintain composure and tread life during long-distance highway driving.
- Some owners of rear-wheel-drive sedans reported rapid outer-edge wear, suggesting the tire may be sensitive to alignment or specific suspension geometries.
The Yokohama Advan dB V552 is widely regarded as a specialized touring tire that prioritizes cabin quietness and ride comfort above all else. While it excels at absorbing road imperfections and reducing noise for daily commuting, users note that its soft sidewall construction results in a lack of steering precision and reduced grip during high-speed maneuvers.
Pros
- Exceptional noise reduction and quiet operation
- Superior ride comfort and vibration absorption
- Effective at smoothing out potholes and road irregularities
Cons
- Soft sidewalls lead to a 'floating' sensation at highway speeds
- Lack of steering sharpness and cornering confidence
- Mediocre grip levels in both wet and dry conditions compared to performance-oriented tires
Observations
- The tire is specifically engineered as an OE fitment for vehicles like the Mazda3 BP, where its soft sidewall is intended to complement stiffer suspension bushings.
- Users report that increasing tire pressure by 3-4 PSI can mitigate the 'floating' sensation experienced at higher speeds.
Specifications
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Kumho Ecsta HM KH31 | B · Yokohama Advan dB V552 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer Touring tires | Summer Premium Touring tires |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
Final verdict
Which one should you actually buy?
75
/ 100
Kumho
70
/ 100
Yokohama
Winner: Kumho Ecsta HM KH31 — better dry, wet and treadwear. Pick the Yokohama Advan dB V552 if comfort matters most to you.
Pick tire A
You want the most grip on dry roads
Kumho Ecsta HM KH31 scores 81 vs 72 on dry.
Pick tire A
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Kumho Ecsta HM KH31 scores 73 vs 66 on wet.
Pick tire A
You want the longest tread life
Kumho Ecsta HM KH31 scores 72 vs 65 on treadwear.
Pick tire A
You enjoy sharp, responsive handling
Kumho Ecsta HM KH31 scores 74 vs 68 on handling.
Tire A · Kumho Ecsta HM KH31
Tire B · Yokohama Advan dB V552
More comparisons
Also compared with
Kumho Ecsta HM KH31 also compared with
Yokohama Advan dB V552 also compared with
How do we compare tires?
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements) normalized against the best tire in each test and weighted toward recent tests. 40% comes from thousands of owner reviews collected from retailers and review sites. When a tire has only one of the two, we use what exists and say so.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score.