Falkens FK-452 or Kumho Ecsta SPT
 

Hey guys - Im currently running FK-452's and I have been quite happy with them. But im getting a new set of shoes... so im debating if I should get Falkens again or try Kumho. What do you guys think?

Any personal reviews is welcomed as well!

Oh yeah, you guys might suggest Nitto, Bridgestone, Michellins, Yokohama's... Yes I would like them.. but its a cost factor. lol

Thanks!

Wes

Go 4 falkens them kumho's r korean they wear out fast...well so did my falkens but it's the way i drive 2...

Being a Korean made tire has nothing to do with wearing out fast :rolleyes: The tread wear between the two is almost identical.

Coming from someone who's actually used both, IMO the Falken's are superior. They seem to have better dry traction, better traction when the tires are cold (when just beginning to drive away after starting the car), and better wet traction. The Falken tread wear is slightly higher too. I do believe the Falken's cost a bit more than the SPT's, but they are an overall better buy.

Also, the SPT seems to run "true" in size; Meaning, they don't seem to have a larger sidewall bulge compared to a tire of the same size from a different manufacturer. The SPT's do seem to have a slight rim protector lip too, so that's something to consider (my Falken's don't).

Thanks!! that was very helpful.

I would definately go Falkens if thats the case. Its actually cheaper too!!

I was quoted 720 for Falkens installed! vs 840 for the Ecsta's. CAD.

Gotta leave the cheaper price for 20's vs 19's! FTW!!

Kumho Ecsta SPT just say no!

I put 10k on my kumho ecsta and ate them alive. They are not worth it at all. I have 4 or 5 friends that work at americas tire co and they agree that they are trash for the price. I think I am going with Falkens next also great price!

Thanks Heist!! your review definately pushes me towards Falkens again.

Yeah no problem! I don't want anyone else to have to deal with them waste of money for me. :driving:

+1 on that brother!!!

There korean made garbage...i wouldn't even use them on my bicycle...

I never liked Falken FK452s... they were loud, not as comfy, and they didn't last too long. While they were great tires for about a month or so, everything about them got worse as the tire wore out. I forgot how good wet traction was, but like everything else, it got worse as the tire wore out.

You should give Bridgestone Potenza RE760 a try. So far, they aren't much less of a tire than the RE050A, but are available at about half the price.

Hell, I even enjoyed the entire life of the Dunlop Direzzas more than the Falkens.

I have the 452's. Great for a DD and even works on the track... it's a very predictable tire and you know exactly when it's about to lose grip (in my case, it never really did). I don't have the exact figures right now, but my current non-staggered set with regular rotations have about 16k on them and 7/32 of tread left. New ones come with 10/32 tread depth. I figure i'll get 35k-40k on this set before needing replacement.

I got a price quote on the Re760's as well. It will cost me 1300 CAD vs 720 for the Falkens. 600 dollar difference :(

Falkens > Kumho.

THanks!

Definitely get the Falkens again, they're great tires.

I've loved mine and will most likely go with another set. I still have some time before they'll need replacing... most likely getting me through 3 summers, which is not bad with the amount of driving I do.
My only complaint is how loud they got this year. Once they start to wear down, the get way louder than my liking.

Wow, seems like they're really ripping you a new one... The price difference between the FK452 and the RE760 shouldn't be so high.

Who are you getting tires from? RE050A cost 230 a piece, RE760 cost 140 a piece, while FK452 cost 130 a piece (USD).