Continental AllSeasonContact 2 vs Michelin CrossClimate 2
What makes this comparison especially useful is that the pattern repeats regardless of test source: the AllSeasonContact 2 racks up category wins in wet braking and wet handling, while the CrossClimate 2 repeatedly tops dry braking, straight-line aquaplaning speeds, and snow metrics. The practical question is therefore less “which is best?” and more “which set of compromises best matches your climate and driving?”
Test Results
Independent comparison tire tests are the best source of data to get tire information from, and the good news is there have been twelve tests which compare both tires directly!
| Tire | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Continental AllSeasonContact 2 | seven | |
| Michelin CrossClimate 2 | four | |
| one draws in one tests | ||
While it might look like the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 is better than the Michelin CrossClimate 2 purely based on the higher number of test wins, tires are very complicated objects which means where one tire is better than the other can be more important in real world use.
Let's look at how the two tires compare across multiple tire test categories.
Key Strengths
- Outstanding wet safety: unbeaten in wet braking across shared results (12/12 wins), with several tests showing multi-metre stopping advantages
- Wet handling confidence and control: consistently faster wet lap/average speeds (wins 9/9 wet handling), typically with more precise, secure balance near the limit
- Strong all-round consistency: repeatedly top-3 overall and multiple test wins (7 overall wins vs 4 for Michelin), reflecting fewer meaningful weaknesses
- Often strong ownership proposition: frequently competitive in wear/value metrics (e.g., better ADAC value and slightly higher predicted mileage in ADAC; best value in one 2024 test)
- Dry braking specialist: wins dry braking in 11/12 shared comparisons, often by ~5-7% (e.g., 40.0 m vs 37.9 m; 40.7 m vs 38.1 m)
- Best-in-class winter behaviour for an all-season: dominant on snow braking (10/10) and typically leads snow traction/handling, often described as “winter-tire-like”
- Straight-line aquaplaning advantage: more frequent wins in straight aquaplaning resistance (9 wins), helping motorway stability in standing water
- Efficiency/comfort often strong: tends to score well on rolling resistance and noise in several tests, supporting low running costs and refinement
Dry Braking
Looking at data from twelve tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during eleven dry braking tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 stopped the vehicle in 4.86% less distance than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Dry Braking: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [s]
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during four dry handling [s] tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 0.96% faster around a lap than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Dry Handling [s]: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from five tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during three dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 0.38% faster around a lap than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Dry Handling
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during two subj. dry handling tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 scored 3.37% more points than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Subj. Dry Handling: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Subj. Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from twelve tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during twelve wet braking tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 stopped the vehicle in 4.8% less distance than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Wet Braking: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Low Grip
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one wet braking - low grip tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 5.57% than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Wet Braking - Low Grip: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Braking - Low Grip winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Concrete
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one wet braking - concrete tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 stopped the vehicle in 5.19% less distance than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Wet Braking - Concrete: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Braking - Concrete winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [s]
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during four wet handling [s] tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 2.51% faster around a wet lap than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Wet Handling [s]: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from five tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during five wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 3.11% faster around a wet lap than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Wet Handling
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one subj. wet handling tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 scored 4.57% more points than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Subj. Wet Handling: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Subj. Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from five tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during four wet circle tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 1.82% faster around a wet circle than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Wet Circle: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from ten tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during nine straight aqua tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 floated at a 1.49% higher speed than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Straight Aqua: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from eight tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during four curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 slipped out at a 2.21% higher speed than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Snow Braking
Looking at data from ten tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during ten snow braking tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 stopped the vehicle in 2.17% less distance than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Snow Braking: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Braking winner was calculated >>
Snow Traction
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during three snow traction tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 accelerated 0.72% faster than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Snow Traction: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Traction winner was calculated >>
Snow Traction
Looking at data from six tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during six snow traction tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 had 2.74% better snow traction than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Snow Traction: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Traction winner was calculated >>
Snow Handling [s]
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during four snow handling [s] tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was 2.76% faster around a lap than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Snow Handling [s]: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Snow Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from five tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during three snow handling [km/h] tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was 0.58% faster around a lap than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Snow Handling [Km/H]: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Snow Handling
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during two subj. snow handling tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 scored 2.73% more points than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Subj. Snow Handling: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Subj. Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Snow Circle
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during two snow circle tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 provided 5.94% more lateral grip than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Snow Circle: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Circle winner was calculated >>
Snow Slalom
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during three snow slalom tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was 1.7% faster through a slalom than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Snow Slalom: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Slalom winner was calculated >>
Ice Braking
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during two ice braking tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 stopped the vehicle 3.49% shorter than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Ice Braking: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Ice Braking winner was calculated >>
Ice Traction
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one ice traction tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 accelerated 3.97% faster than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Ice Traction: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Ice Traction winner was calculated >>
Subj. Comfort
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one subj. comfort tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 scored 10% more points than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Subj. Comfort: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Subj. Comfort winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from nine tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during five noise tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 measured 0.06% quieter than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Noise: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Tire Weight
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one tire weight tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 weighed 5.91% less than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Tire Weight: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Tire Weight winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one wear tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 is predicted to cover 0.72% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Wear: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Value
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one value tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 proved to have a 1.42% better value based on price/1000km than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Value: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Value winner was calculated >>
Price
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one price tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 cost 8.45% less than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Price: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Price winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from nine tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during five rolling resistance tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 had a 1.88% lower rolling resistance than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Fuel Consumption
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during three fuel consumption tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 used 1.31% less fuel than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Fuel Consumption: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Fuel Consumption winner was calculated >>
Abrasion
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one abrasion tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 emitted 20.9% less particle wear matter than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Abrasion: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Abrasion winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Continental AllSeasonContact 2 Driver Reviews
Drivers generally describe the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 as a strong all-rounder with particularly confidence-inspiring wet grip and braking, good dry performance for an all-season, and reassuring capability in light snow. Comfort and cabin refinement are frequently praised, with many reporting low noise and a supple ride, and several high-scoring reviews noting very slow, even wear. The main recurring criticism is steering feel: a noticeable on-centre dead spot or soft sidewall/response delay that reduces precision (especially when pushed or at higher speeds), with wear rate mentioned as a smaller, mixed minority concern.
Based on 51 reviews with an average rating of 82%
Michelin CrossClimate 2 Driver Reviews
Across 132 driver reviews, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 is widely viewed as a highly capable all-weather tire that delivers strong dry grip and standout snow traction, letting many drivers run one set year-round with high confidence. Comfort and refinement are often praised (frequently described as quiet and smooth when new), and many users report good-to-excellent longevity for the category. A notable minority report reduced confidence in wet handling/braking (sometimes worsening as the tire wears), along with common complaints about increased road noise on certain surfaces and a measurable fuel-economy hit versus low-rolling-resistance summer tires.
Based on 143 reviews with an average rating of 81%
Conclusion
If your winter involves regular snow/ice and you want an all-season that behaves closest to a winter tire, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 still has a clear edge in winter capability and dry braking bite. It wins dry braking 11 times out of 12 and snow braking 10 times out of 10, often pairing that with strong snow traction/handling (e.g., TÜV snow handling 78.05 s vs 82.73 s). The main trade-off is that, across multiple reports (including ADAC commentary), Michelin's wet grip is typically “good but not best,” and it repeatedly gives away meaningful wet braking distance to the Continental.
Value is more mixed than the reputations suggest: some tests show Continental as better value per distance (e.g., strong value score in one 2024 test and ADAC value advantage), while one major AutoBild 2024 result strongly favors Michelin for wear (62,680 km vs 49,330 km). The takeaway: choose Continental primarily for wet-road safety and all-round balance; choose Michelin primarily for snow-heavy climates and top-tier dry braking, and verify pricing/mileage expectations in your exact size.
Key Differences
- Wet braking is the decisive safety separator: Continental wins wet braking in every shared test (12-0), with gaps ranging from small to clearly meaningful (e.g., 50.8 m vs 55.2 m in one SUV test).
- Dry braking flips the story: Michelin dominates (11-1), frequently delivering ~5-7% shorter stops, which can be the difference between a near-miss and an impact on dry roads.
- Snow performance favours Michelin overall: Michelin wins snow braking (10-0) and most snow traction/handling metrics, repeatedly earning “best winter” remarks in qualitative notes.
- Handling character: Continental tends to be the more balanced, predictable tire across wet and dry (often winning dry handling too: 7 wins), while Michelin can feel slower/less sharp in some dry and wet handling comments despite its braking strength.
- Aquaplaning pattern: Michelin more often leads in straight aquaplaning speed (9 wins), while curved aquaplaning is more mixed, with Continental sometimes matching or beating Michelin depending on test.
- Running costs are size/test dependent: Michelin shows a major wear win in one AutoBild dataset (62,680 km vs 49,330 km), but Continental leads wear/value in other sources (e.g., ADAC value advantage and slightly higher predicted mileage), so the 'cheapest per km' outcome varies by fitment and pricing.
Overall Winner: Michelin CrossClimate 2
Based on the tire test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 has demonstrated better overall performance in this comparison. However, as you can see from the spider diagram above, each tire has its own strengths which should be considered in your final tire buying choice.Similar Comparisons
Looking for more tire comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tires:
Footnote
This page has been developed using tire industry testing best practices. This means we are only comparing tests which have had both tires in the same test.
Why is this important? Tire testing is heavily affected by things like surface grip levels and surface temperature, which means you can only compare values from the same day. During a tire test external condition changes are calculated into the overall results, but it is not possible to calculate this between tire tests performed on different days or at different locations.
As a result you will see other tests on Tire Reviews which feature both the %s and %s, but as they weren't conducted on the same day, the results are not comparable.
Lots of other websites do this sort of tire comparison, Tire Reviews doesn't.
Discussion
- No comments yet — be the first.