64
/ 100
Objective (60%)
–/100
No test data yet
User signal (40%)
72/100
11 owner reviews
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
Head-to-head
Updated September 2026
Kumho Ecsta V720 vs Nexen N FERA SUR4G — Compared (September 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%)
74/100
1 professional test
User signal (40%)
72/100
5 owner reviews
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
VerdictWinner: Nexen N FERA SUR4G — better wet and comfort. Pick the Kumho Ecsta V720 if handling, treadwear and dry matter 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 V720 leads by 3
Why this score
| Source | Ecsta V720 | N FERA SUR4G |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | 87 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 93 | 94 |
Wet
Score (0–100)
N FERA SUR4G leads by 32
Why this score
| Source | Ecsta V720 | N FERA SUR4G |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | 87 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 54 | 84 |
Comfort
Score (0–100)
N FERA SUR4G leads by 3
Why this score
| Source | Ecsta V720 | N FERA SUR4G |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | 45 | 48 |
Treadwear
Score (0–100)
Ecsta V720 leads by 4
Why this score
| Source | Ecsta V720 | N FERA SUR4G |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | 50 | 46 |
Handling
Score (0–100)
Ecsta V720 leads by 11
Why this score
| Source | Ecsta V720 | N FERA SUR4G |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | 94 | 83 |
Scores at a glance
| Category | Kumho Ecsta V720 | Nexen N FERA SUR4G |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 64 | 70 |
| Dry | 93 | 90 |
| Wet | 54 | 86 |
| Comfort | 45 | 48 |
| Treadwear | 50 | 46 |
| Handling | 94 | 83 |
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
64
/ 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 V720 is widely regarded as a high-value extreme performance tire that excels in dry-weather traction and steering feedback. While users appreciate its competitive pricing and capability for spirited street or casual track use, the trade-offs include rapid tread wear and significant road noise, which may deter those seeking a refined daily driving experience.
Pros
- Exceptional dry grip and traction for high-horsepower vehicles
- Excellent price-to-performance ratio
- Precise steering feedback and firm sidewall construction
- Reliable performance for spirited street driving and casual track days
Cons
- High levels of road noise
- Rapid tread wear
- Inconsistent wet weather performance, with some reports of hydroplaning
- Lack of comfort for daily commuting
Observations
- High-horsepower rear-wheel-drive vehicles (350hp-500hp) report excellent straight-line and cornering traction.
- Lightweight vehicles (sub-1 ton) may experience more pronounced issues with wet-weather grip and road noise.
The Nexen N Fera SUR4G is widely regarded as a high-performance track-focused tire that delivers exceptional dry grip at a competitive price point. While users praise its track capabilities and surprising wet-weather performance, the tire is noted for its rapid tread wear, making it better suited for dedicated track use than daily driving.
Pros
- Exceptional dry track grip
- Competitive pricing compared to rivals like the Hankook RS4
- Surprisingly capable performance in wet conditions
- Consistent performance during track events
Cons
- Rapid tread wear and short lifespan
- Not ideal for high-mileage daily driving
- Performance drops off significantly as the tire wears
Observations
- Users report the tire is highly effective for competitive track events and racing scenarios.
- The tire's longevity is significantly impacted by frequent track usage, with some users cycling through multiple sets per season.
Specifications
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Kumho Ecsta V720 | B · Nexen N FERA SUR4G |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer Extreme Performance tires | Summer Extreme Performance tires |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
Final verdict
Which one should you actually buy?
64
/ 100
Kumho
70
/ 100
Nexen
Winner: Nexen N FERA SUR4G — better wet and comfort. Pick the Kumho Ecsta V720 if handling, treadwear and dry matter most to you.
Pick tire B
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Nexen N FERA SUR4G scores 86 vs 54 on wet.
Pick tire A
You enjoy sharp, responsive handling
Kumho Ecsta V720 scores 94 vs 83 on handling.
Pick tire A
You want the longest tread life
Kumho Ecsta V720 scores 50 vs 46 on treadwear.
Pick tire A
You want the most grip on dry roads
Kumho Ecsta V720 scores 93 vs 90 on dry.
Tire A · Kumho Ecsta V720
Tire B · Nexen N FERA SUR4G
More comparisons
Also compared with
Kumho Ecsta V720 also compared with
Nexen N FERA SUR4G 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.