Menu

Michelin Energy Saver 4

Replaces the Michelin Energy Saver+

The Michelin Energy Saver 4 is a Premium Touring Summer tire designed to be fitted to Passenger Cars.

The quick answer

Owners say 80% from 3 owner reviews Read the reviews
Tests say Sorry, we don't currently have any test data for the Michelin Energy Saver 4

Built from every independent test result and vetted owner review we hold for this tire - the evidence is all further down the page. Data updated July 2026.

  • 3owner reviews
  • 55,500miles driven
All Tests

Sorry, we don't currently have any magazine tire tests for the Michelin Energy Saver 4

Frequently Asked Questions
What does the Michelin Energy Saver 4 replace?
The Michelin Energy Saver 4 is the successor to the Michelin Energy Saver+ in Michelin's range.
Owner Questions
Ask a question

Questions and Answers for the Michelin Energy Saver 4

Sorry, we don't currently have any questions and answers for the Michelin Energy Saver 4. Why not submit a question to our tire experts using the form below!

Michelin Energy Saver 4 Owner Reviews

Review this tire

What owners say

Across 3 owner ratings the Michelin Energy Saver 4 averages 80%. Owners rate Wear highest at 9.7 out of 10 and Road Feedback lowest at 6.3. 2 of those reviews come from owners past 10,000 miles.

Owner ratings averaged from 3 ratings

  • Owner score 80%
  • Wear 97%
  • Handling 80%
  • Comfort 80%
  • Dry Grip 77%
  • Wet Grip 77%
  • Road Feedback 63%

All 3 Michelin Energy Saver 4 reviews

Score spread across 3 written reviews
83%
Member
Initial Impressions
  • Subaru
  • 225/45 R17
  • 30,000 miles

45000km update.
Car : sambar van (hijet cargo) 2021 s321v.

A bit of context. I drive in Japan. Always disconnect all aid before driving. Rarely push over 3000rpm on road except climbing.
Front camber -1.75
Maintain constant 67km/hr on every spot on the corner and straight 99 percent of the time.
Tested this van and tire limitations when it's safe.
Fuel economy 17.9km/l . Most average 13km/l.
I find maintain in and out of corner saves fuel. So it approaches tire limit in some public twist roads without legal issue. so take my review with this in mind.

Dry : 8 points.
It have decent grip. very stiff side wall (xl tire) . Allow confident mid corner and exit throttle if you want. Record 119km/hr on tightest bend on Meihan national road ( Near or in Nara).
This car shines in tight bends like from Nara 五條 to 熊野. But that's more to the car than the tire.

Wet: 10 points.
I drove in record typhoon recently. And it have grip that you dare to use.
Maybe it's the car sitting high with better visibility. But in rain maintaing 67km /hr through bends is still easy. You'll suddenly found that do people follow you in dry are actually driving uncomfortable. Because in rain you see most cars input are messy.
I believe they have better tires. But if tire doesn't evoke confidence you can't go fast.

Feed back and handling : 6
It's more than enough for this van but I don't know others. It's rigid so I can feel the road. But the shoulder will slip.
It didn't drift but you can feel the tire slip or drift between every shoudler patch when cornering. And it need rotation quite often.
It's an eco tire and it fits this van.

Wear: 10
If you drive with less cornering speed it last for ever. This van rolls like no other. So it leans heavily on its shoulder.
I do smooth weight transition. Press the factory suspension down as it roll and pin it with tiny throttle. So no sudden movement.
Still the massive weight on the shoulder block makes it very different from center.
Center can still do another 60,000 km I guess but the shoudler probably 10,000km.

Comfort: 6
This is just a guess. on my van it's 10. But on regular cars it might not be.
Side wall is rigid which fits the van with massive suspention preload.

I just installed Tein Flex z last week and it it feel a bit noisy and harsh. Maybe that's what other cars will feel ?

Overall very happy with it. But I mean on my van. never tried it on other cars.
If you want stiff eco tire. this is it.

This owner's scores
  • Dry Grip 8
  • Wet Grip 10
  • Road Feedback 6
  • Handling 8
  • Wear 10
  • Comfort 6
  • Buy again 10
Helpful 36
83%
Member
Initial Impressions
I'm reviewing it base on it price and other interchangeable tires.
My tires were 145/80r12 to begin with, Yokohama Job, RY52 with 8000km. A decent truck eco tire.
Car is Subaru Sambar van, a rebadged Daihatsu Hijet cargo.

I'm reviewing with all traction control and stability control off.
Dry grip, is way better. With the RY52, rear slides when I wanted it to. With Energy saver4, it just won't slide even I give full gas out of a tight corner. This van doesn't have enough power to power slide Energy saver4 on high grip surface.
Wet grip, is also better but mostly in lateral grip. RY52 have very good vertical grip ( accelerate and decelerate ). I haven't try to slide it yet in wet surface.

Feed back, is surprisingly out of my expectation. Best tire pressure for RY52 is F/R: 45/45 psi. For Energy saver is F/R: 45/48 psi.
RY52 have a larger range of tire pressure that can be driven, Front pressure is good from 42-45. Rear is good from 40-50. With 50PSI in the rear, I do feel a bit on the edge in the wet.
Energy saver4 however, is very tricky to set tire pressure.
Front can not be lower than 45. There will be no feed back. Rear can not be higher than 48, it will produce lots of noise.
Rear is best setting at 45 (or lower) but with F/R both 45, the car wants to understeer. Therefore I've settled with F 45. R 48.
Another thing is RY52 have way better handling feed back mid corner. I feel every bit of the tire, with Energy saver4, I know the general direction but not which part of the tire is gripping exactly. I don't think Energy Saver4 is to blame here, since RY52 is super hard LT tire.

Handling, it's higher than the testing vehicle. I'm at jail speed with 53 horse power on all the route ( mountain and twisting ) with +30km/hr faster than RY52, still I'm only afraid of the van rolling over , and not even a squeak heard. I don't think this van needs better grip than Energy saver.

Comfort, is something that you instantly feel, I feel it, my wife feels it. It way quieter and softer than RY52. I would say this aspect is what most people feels.

Finally, fuel economy. The wheel + tire set up is 6kg heavier per corner (12 to 14, RY52 to Energy saver), which is 24kg heavier for four wheels.
It is a lot heavier. In the stop and go city, fuel economy drops 1-2%. On mountain road it's within margin of error ( Screen shows better). On 60-90km/hr highway, it is 3-5% better.
There is no other way around the weight. During stop and go, you need more energy. During climbing, you need more energy.
But the eco compound that Michelin uses does provide lower friction therefore the fuel economy haven't worsen.
This owner's scores
  • Dry Grip 8
  • Wet Grip 7
  • Road Feedback 5
  • Handling 9
  • Wear 10
  • Comfort 10
  • Buy again 9
Helpful 983
74%
Member
  • Toyota Wish
  • 195/65 R15
  • 25,000 miles
  • A Combination of Roads
  • Average
No comments
This owner's scores
  • Dry Grip 7
  • Wet Grip 6
  • Road Feedback 8
  • Handling 7
  • Wear 9
  • Comfort 8
  • Buy again 7
Helpful 850

Which tires do you drive?

Researching the Michelin Energy Saver 4? Rate the tires you actually drive - and help the next buyer choose.

Own the Michelin Energy Saver 4?
Find your next tire
All tire tests
Rate your tires

My tires

Saved in this browser on this site. No account needed. Clearing browser data removes your choices.

Vehicle and size

Check the size, load and speed ratings on your vehicle. Saving a size does not confirm fitment.

Saved tires

Save tires from a tire page, test or comparison to keep them here.

Select 2–8 saved tires. Ranked comparisons require at least two shared tests.