Which is better for snow?

The Yokohama. It is 3PMSF certified, which means it passed a standard snow traction test. The Kumho is all-season but not 3PMSF rated. Neither replaces a true winter tire on ice.

The Yokohama on paper. Its 740 UTQG treadwear rating and 65,000-mile warranty beat the Kumho's 440 rating and 60,000-mile warranty. Real life depends on rotation, alignment and driving style.

Is the Yokohama worth the extra $45?

Yes if you want the longer warranty and light-snow rating. If you drive mostly dry and wet highways, the Kumho covers that for less money.

The Kumho is built around a noise-canceling tread, and owners praise its quiet ride. The Yokohama also gets quiet-ride praise, so the gap is small.

Do both fit my vehicle?

Check your door-jamb placard. The Yokohama comes in 16- to 20-inch sizes; the Kumho listing is a single 17-inch size, so confirm the exact size before ordering.

Which has the better shopper rating?

The Kumho, 4.8 of 5 from 136 ratings versus 4.4 of 5 from 196 for the Yokohama. The Yokohama sample is larger.

Yokohama Geolandar CV G058 vs Kumho Crugen Premium KL33

Buy the Yokohama Geolandar CV G058 if you want the longest treadwear coverage and light-snow capability: it carries a 740 UTQG treadwear rating, a 65,000-mile warranty and 3PMSF certification. Buy the Kumho Crugen Premium KL33 if you want the lower price and a quiet highway ride for a crossover or SUV. On November 6, 2026 the Kumho is $135.50 at Tires Easy and the Yokohama is $180.99 at Amazon, a gap of about $45 per tire.

Today the Kumho Crugen Premium KL33 costs $45.49 less at its best price.

Ask our shopping agent

It checks today's price at every store, compares the alternatives and answers in about a minute.