View Poll Results: Falkens FK-452's or Kumho Ecsta SPT
Falkens FK-452
80.95%
Kumho Ecsta SPT
19.05%
Voters: 21. You may not vote on this poll

Falkens FK-452 or Kumho Ecsta SPT

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old Aug 13, 2009 | 04:24 PM
  #1  
Wes_888's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 1
From: Toronto, Canada
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
 
Reply
Old Aug 13, 2009 | 04:25 PM
  #2  
Gr8speed68's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
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...
 
Reply
Old Aug 13, 2009 | 05:06 PM
  #3  
E-Ticket Ride's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 55
Originally Posted by Gr8speed68
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 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).
 
Reply
Old Aug 13, 2009 | 08:57 PM
  #4  
Wes_888's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 1
From: Toronto, Canada
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!!
 
Reply
Old Aug 13, 2009 | 09:02 PM
  #5  
Heist.'s Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (31)
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,020
Likes: 59
From: 714
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!
 
Reply
Old Aug 13, 2009 | 09:06 PM
  #6  
Wes_888's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 1
From: Toronto, Canada
Thanks Heist!! your review definately pushes me towards Falkens again.
 
Reply
Old Aug 13, 2009 | 09:10 PM
  #7  
Heist.'s Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (31)
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,020
Likes: 59
From: 714
Originally Posted by Wes_888
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.
 
Reply
Old Aug 13, 2009 | 09:36 PM
  #8  
Wes_888's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 1
From: Toronto, Canada
Originally Posted by Heist.
Yeah no problem! I don't want anyone else to have to deal with them waste of money for me.
+1 on that brother!!!
 
Reply
Old Aug 14, 2009 | 06:51 AM
  #9  
Gr8speed68's Avatar
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by E-Ticket Ride
Being a Korean made tire has nothing to do with wearing out fast 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).
There korean made garbage...i wouldn't even use them on my bicycle...
 
Reply
Old Aug 14, 2009 | 08:48 AM
  #10  
dofu's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,822
Likes: 242
From: Silicon Valley
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.
 
Reply
Old Aug 14, 2009 | 08:51 AM
  #11  
soundmike's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,093
Likes: 213
From: Inside my G
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.
 
Reply
Old Aug 14, 2009 | 09:58 AM
  #12  
Wes_888's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,904
Likes: 1
From: Toronto, Canada
Originally Posted by dofu
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 got a price quote on the Re760's as well. It will cost me 1300 CAD vs 720 for the Falkens. 600 dollar difference

Originally Posted by soundmike
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.
Falkens > Kumho.

THanks!
 
Reply
Old Aug 14, 2009 | 02:27 PM
  #13  
Borna's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,328
Likes: 3
From: Dubai
Definitely get the Falkens again, they're great tires.
 
Reply
Old Aug 14, 2009 | 02:40 PM
  #14  
AesonVirus's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (62)
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,881
Likes: 85
From: Central MA
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.
 
Reply
Old Aug 14, 2009 | 03:06 PM
  #15  
dofu's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (9)
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,822
Likes: 242
From: Silicon Valley
Originally Posted by Wes_888
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
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).
 
Reply


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:46 PM.