Help me decide on my next tires! (Michelin Cross Climate, Sport Pilot AS, Continental ExtremeContact DWS)

[J-a-x]

I know, I know, not another tire thread. But I've been searching for a while and I can't seem to answer all of my questions....

A little background: I drive a Model Y LR, 19" wheels in Boston. Yeah it snows here but not as much as most people think it does. each year I might end up driving in the snow 3 or 4 times, max. Lately we rarely get snow in the city, and when we do I just don't drive. I work form home so driving in the snow is not critical but it is nice to be safe when I end up doing it. Usually the snow is completely melted after a snowstorm within a few days, a week max. So not looking for the same tires I'd buy if I lived in Vermont for example.

My car came with Continental ProContact RX All-Season tires. I'm at 16k miles and I've forecasted that I'll need new tires before next winter, maybe somewhere around 30k miles. I'm keeping an eye on the tread depth. I like to plan in advance so thinking about which tires I'll get next. I find that the ProContact RX is not so great in snow, otherwise I don't have big complaints about them.

Here's what I'm. looking for:

• I want a tire that performs better in the snow, but it doesn't need to be fully snow optimized since I only drive in snow 3-4 times per year.
• I want all-season tires. I don't want to change my tires to snow tires just for those 3 or 4 snowy drives... so winter tires are out of the question. We can start another thread to discuss the merits of winter tires, I'm sure they have some benefits but the cost/benefit does not work for me.
• I want a new tire that also ideally maintains my current level of dry and wet braking, don't want to the new tires to be more dangerous during the 99% of time I spend driving in either dry or rainy conditions (again driving in snow happens but not often).
• I don't want to lose any range compared to what I have now. So the baseline is the ProContact RX on 19" wheels.

Tires I am considering are:

• Michelin Cross Climate
• Michelin Pilot Sport AS
• Continental ExtremeContact DWS

One problem I have doing research is I find so many people who say that every single tire I look at has a big efficiency losses compared to OEM tires, but everybody has different OEM tires and wheel sizes, so that doesn't mean much to me. Maybe their car came with summer tires for example and it's not a fair comparison unless you state which OEM tire you have. They also seem to only test the tires when new which is not a fair comparison since new tires will also decrease efficiency a bit.

From some of the reviews I've seen (for example Tire Rack and TyreReviews), the Cross Climate should have LOWER rolling resistance than any of the other options, so despite the aggressive tread pattern they seem to paradoxically be potentially better at efficiency? Not sure if I should trust this or nor and curious what other peoples experiences are.

For example see the two screenshots below, the Wh/Mi seems better for CrossClimate (263) vs ProContact which I have now (274). Does that seem accurate?

I've read more people complaining that Pilot Sports resulted in lost efficiency than Cross Climate which seems weird excuse Pilot Sport appears to have a less aggressive tread pattern, and I can't find any test data backing that up, only anecdotal stories comparing to OEM tires (but which OEM tire at how many miles?). Does anybody know if that makes sense that the Sport Pilot would be the most likely result in lower efficiency?

To Contradict that last statement, Sullivan Tire says that efficiency should be identical with ProContact, ExtremeContact, and CrossClimate but Pilot Sport is rated one better for efficiency! That goes against most of the anecdotal stories I'ver read.

In the end I feel like I'm leaning towards the CrossClimate because its supposed to be hands down the best in snow, as good as my last tire in rain (or better according to Sullivan) and from the data above its at least the same, if not better than my current tires for efficiency. And the tread seems like it'll last longer, even in summer.

Does this sound like a reasonable decision? Does anybody have any other experiences that might help me choose one tire over the other here or pick a different one entirely?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Ostrichsak]

The DWS 06+ is the only tire I will ever run year 'round on my Teslas in Colorado. I fell for the review BS that makes it seem like other options are better in the "winter" and my only guess is because people in California are rating them for "winter" driving. That or reviews are artificially stacked to prefer one tire over another even if it's not as good. I made that mistake previously and I'll now deviate from my beloved DWS 06+ ever again. You can search as this has been discussed before recently and there's lots of info if you want more details.

 

[J-a-x]

The DWS 06+ is the only tire I will ever run year 'round on my Teslas in Colorado. I fell for the review BS that makes it seem like other options are better in the "winter" and my only guess is because people in California are rating them for "winter" driving. That or reviews are artificially stacked to prefer one tire over another even if it's not as good. I made that mistake previously and I'll now deviate from my beloved DWS 06+ ever again. You can search as this has been discussed before recently and there's lots of info if you want more details.

DWS looks pretty much identical on the Sullivan Tire comparison to the CrossClimate except that CrossClimate has better snow rating (but who knows if that's really true). I have read good things about snow performance of the DWS so I am not worried, but how about efficiency? Any thoughts on efficiency compared to other tires?

 

[Ostrichsak]

DWS looks pretty much identical on the Sullivan Tire comparison to the CrossClimate except that CrossClimate has better snow rating (but who knows if that's really true). I have read good things about snow performance of the DWS so I am not worried, but how about efficiency? Any thoughts on efficiency compared to other tires?

For me, efficiency is of minimal concern given how efficient these vehicles already are. I'm not willing to sacrifice safety for a couple pennies worth of juice. That's just me. Others put more value in that and that's why they make hundreds of different tires... all offering something different but they all make sacrifices in other categories in order to do so. No perfect tire exists.

From my first hand testing, This DWS 06+ tire works the best year 'round in Colorado in any condition and handles the performance well in the summer months too. No tire is perfect and tires that claim to be more efficient 1) typically make sacrifices in other categories and 2) the real world efficiency increase amounts to nearly nothing to even be worth it, IMO.

Comparing ICE cars that convert around 20-25% of the fuel you put into your tank into forward momentum to the over 90% that an EV can convert into forward momentum makes little tenths here and there almost pointless if the topic is efficiency. When that's the starting point it's real easy to not waste too much resources on wringing out every ounce of efficiency possible.

It's barely a drop in the bucket and a couple pounds of tire pressure from optimal will likely make a bigger difference.

 

[J-a-x]

For me, efficiency is of minimal concern given how efficient these vehicles already are. I'm not willing to sacrifice safety for a couple pennies worth of juice. That's just me. Others put more value in that and that's why they make hundreds of different tires... all offering something different but they all make sacrifices in other categories in order to do so. No perfect tire exists.

From my first hand testing, This DWS 06+ tire works the best year 'round in Colorado in any condition and handles the performance well in the summer months too. No tire is perfect and tires that claim to be more efficient 1) typically make sacrifices in other categories and 2) the real world efficiency increase amounts to nearly nothing to even be worth it, IMO.

Comparing ICE cars that convert around 20-25% of the fuel you put into your tank into forward momentum to the over 90% that an EV can convert into forward momentum makes little tenths here and there almost pointless if the topic is efficiency. When that's the starting point it's real easy to not waste too much resources on wringing out every ounce of efficiency possible.

It's barely a drop in the bucket and a couple pounds of tire pressure from optimal will likely make a bigger difference.

I get what you're saying but here is how I think about range/efficiency :

Consider arriving at a ski resort with 30% battery remaining and the supercharger on the way home requires 25% charge to get to. That's not perfect but it is doable. But arriving with 20% remaining might I need to make an hour stop at a L2 charger in a remote town after skiing just so I can make it to the supercharger on the return trip. In certain scenarios 10% range reduction can meaningfully impact convenience. Just pointing out how range can make an impact on this type of trip. And my car is only going to have less overall range as it ages, so hoping to not take a 10% hit on tires.

That said, I'd gladly take a 2% hit on range to get much safer tires. But I definitely want to balance range with traction...

If the CrossClimate had a 2% range reduction but the DWS had a 10% reduction I'd definitely take the CrossClimate, but it's so hard to know...

 

[MattM24]

I get what you're saying but here is how I think about range/efficiency :

Consider arriving at a ski resort with 30% battery remaining and the supercharger on the way home requires 25% charge to get to. That's not perfect but it is doable. But arriving with 20% remaining might I need to make an hour stop at a L2 charger in a remote town after skiing just so I can make it to the supercharger on the return trip. In certain scenarios 10% range reduction can meaningfully impact convenience. Just pointing out how range can make an impact on this type of trip. And my car is only going to have less overall range as it ages, so hoping to not take a 10% hit on tires.

That said, I'd gladly take a 2% hit on range to get much safer tires. But I definitely want to balance range with traction...

If the CrossClimate had a 2% range reduction but the DWS had a 10% reduction I'd definitely take the CrossClimate, but it's so hard to know...

In your scenario, there’s a good chance that you wouldn’t make it anyway, since the battery would cold soak while you were skiing. Are you staying for a few hours or overnight? Are you parking in a garage or out in the cold? If it sunny out? How cold is it?

There are many variables. Tires are just another variable.

I would suggest you charge up at that supercharger until you hit 80%. Arrive at the resort around 55% and make it back to the Supercharger after.

 

[J-a-x]

In your scenario, there’s a good chance that you wouldn’t make it anyway, since the battery would cold soak while you were skiing. Are you staying for a few hours or overnight? Are you parking in a garage or out in the cold? If it sunny out? How cold is it?

There are many variables. Tires are just another variable.

I would suggest you charge up at that supercharger until you hit 80%. Arrive at the resort around 55% and make it back to the Supercharger after.

This was an example form last weekend. No issue with getting back to the supercharger cold soaked, but there would have been had I lost 10% range. I usually do day trips skiing rather than overnights.

Yeah, one solution would be to always charge twice, once in the morning and again in the evening, but I still prefer not to lose too much range when upgrading my tires, if at all possible because that extra 10% range can be convenient with my weekly driving...

 

[Mrdrbot23]

I have the same Continentals on my '23 MYLR and I hate them. I keep them at the recommended 42 PSI and they feel numb when cornering and they have poor grip in wet conditions. I also live in New England but I work from home so I don't *have* to drive in snow much. They've been okay in snow so far but I drive super carefully with them since I have low confidence in their grip, even after only 8,000 miles of wear.

I've had the Michelin Pilot Sports and Cross Climate 2s on my previous vehicle, a BMW X3. The Pilot Sports were good but the Cross Climate's were awesome - excellent road feel and grip in all conditions. I gave that X3 with the Cross Climates to my dad when I got the MYLR and he's been super impressed with them too.

I plan to get the Cross Climates when these crappy Continentals wear out. They might be noisier than the Continentals but I don't care - I want the better road feel and grip. If they are less efficient, that will be a bummer but still doable for me.

 

[fhteagle]

Agreed that the OEM Contis are not good at all. Tesla cheaped out on these and got what they didn't pay for, for sure.

I've had CrossClimate 2s on my Volt for 18 months, during two Colorado winters (one very snowy, one mild) and the intervening warm seasons. Efficiency/range is slightly lower than previous Bridgestone EP422+ by at most ~5%. Winter grip is impressive for an "all season", but still will lose out to a dedicated, even non studded winter tire. I hit an unexpected frosty patch in a shaded curve, and all four tires let go and reconnected together with absolutely zero drama. CC2s crawl through piled snow easily, whether dry and loose, wet and heavy, or even melted and refrozen into snow cone like material. It's almost like the tire comes with built in snow socks already on. Dry and wet ice grip is again impressive, but there's only so much a tire can do to mitigate the laws of physics. Wet grip is what I would call better than average, the deep angled tread blocks do move a lot of water sideways (and put a ton of splatter on the side of your car) but they will get overwhelmed and threaten hydroplaning if you try to do the limit in any kind of standing water.

Sidewalls are relatively stiff, so may not help the ride in the Y much, but will keep the body roll in check in the corners. CC2s start a little louder but soften to typical tire noise levels after maybe 3000 miles. These are not performance tires, and you'll probably be able to spin them on dry pavement if you hammer them off the line, and they'll complain a lot at the limit, but give you a lot of warning before giving up the ghost. Braking in dry conditions is very good, no drama, very straightforward. I'd say they won't harm, but won't help the performance in dry conditions.

One odd quirk of the tread pattern is it really seeks the lowest point of the lane rut, or tracks imperfections on the pavement. You'll drive along and the car will decide if wants to be 1 or 2 inches to the left _right_now_. It's not dangerous or unsafe, and does get better with initial break in, but if you are the kind of person who pays as close of attention as I do what the car is doing, it's definitely a weird behavior. Again, not bad enough to say don't get the tire, just understand it's going to have an extra effect on drive line until they wear in a bit.

Biggest downside is running CC2s throughout summer, you'll see more wear in the summer months. Especially so if you're going over gravel, dirt roads, or even heavily pot holed paved roads. It's not crazy bad, and they probably will last longer than the OEM Conti's due to starting with like 3x the tread depth, but the CC2s are not going to be long life champs.

In short, CC2s are on the short list for the first tire replacement on the Y next year, but not so awesome as to be a slam dunk with no competition.

 

[J-a-x]

I have the same Continentals on my '23 MYLR and I hate them. I keep them at the recommended 42 PSI and they feel numb when cornering and they have poor grip in wet conditions. I also live in New England but I work from home so I don't *have* to drive in snow much. They've been okay in snow so far but I drive super carefully with them since I have low confidence in their grip, even after only 8,000 miles of wear.

I've had the Michelin Pilot Sports and Cross Climate 2s on my previous vehicle, a BMW X3. The Pilot Sports were good but the Cross Climate's were awesome - excellent road feel and grip in all conditions. I gave that X3 with the Cross Climates to my dad when I got the MYLR and he's been super impressed with them too.

I plan to get the Cross Climates when these crappy Continentals wear out. They might be noisier than the Continentals but I don't care - I want the better road feel and grip. If they are less efficient, that will be a bummer but still doable for me.

I, like you, work from home (although that could change with my next job) and typically can just stay home on snow days. I do go skiing a lot but it’s not like it snows every day so even with ski trips to VT/NH i rarely drive in deep snow. When I do end up driving in snow, I also have to be extra cautious with the OEM ProContact and it makes me nervous… fine so far but have definitely lost traction when I did not expect to. So definitely eyeing those Cross Climates…

 

[J-a-x]

I've had CrossClimate 2s on my Volt for 18 months, during two Colorado winters (one very snowy, one mild) and the intervening warm seasons. Efficiency/range is slightly lower than previous Bridgestone EP422+ by at most ~5%.

Interesting, I wonder how that compares. You lost 5% range on a volt compared to Bridgestones, I wonder how similar those Bridgestones are to my Contis. Anyway, 5% isn’t a deal breaker, I’d prefer 0% but 5% is not as bad as 10 or 20% which I’ve read from some other all seasons (although I’m still skeptical of all the reviews).

From the data sheets I posted in my first post, the CrossClimate 2s seem to have lower rolling resistance and more energy efficient than the OEM ProContact (seems strange due to the aggressive tread pattern though) so I think I should be good but just hard to know how accurate that data sheet is and I’ve read a few contradictory stories…

If anyone gets the CrossClimate before i do, please post the Wh/Mi ! I get around 250 Wh/Mi (long term average) on my OEM ProContacts and wonder how close I can get on my next tires. Measuring them is really hard because if you measure both Wh/Mi on the same day you’d have the same weather and conditions but a worn tire vs. a new tire and if you measure 6 months later you have different conditions.

I wish someone would do a controlled experiment with equally worn tires swapped out and measured on the same day!

 

[Ostrichsak]

I have the same Continentals on my '23 MYLR and I hate them.

The OP listed two different Continental tires. One is crap, one is the best tire I've ever tested in true 4-seasons on these cars.

 

[MattM24]

This was an example form last weekend. No issue with getting back to the supercharger cold soaked, but there would have been had I lost 10% range. I usually do day trips skiing rather than overnights.

Yeah, one solution would be to always charge twice, once in the morning and again in the evening, but I still prefer not to lose too much range when upgrading my tires, if at all possible because that extra 10% range can be convenient with my weekly driving...

In your scenario, if it required 10% more than the 25% to get there, it would have used 27.5% and you would have still made it.
I guess the issue would have been the 70% it took you to get there would have been 77% and therefore you’d only have 27% when you stopped.

I was in Quebec City this past weekend and the -10C weather caused me to use 50% more battery on my trip to the first charger. That was a little over 300wh/km on that leg. The high winds didn’t help either.

You get incredible mileage. My lifetime average is 176wh/km and this trip was 210wh/km.

 

[Mrdrbot23]

My car came with Continental ProContact RX All-Season tires. I'm at 16k miles and I've forecasted that I'll need new tires before next winter, maybe somewhere around 30k miles. I'm keeping an eye on the tread depth. I like to plan in advance so thinking about which tires I'll get next. I find that the ProContact RX is not so great in snow, otherwise I don't have big complaints about them.

The OP listed two different Continental tires. One is crap, one is the best tire I've ever tested in true 4-seasons on these cars.

I was referring to the ones he states that his car came with (same as my MYLR). But your comment made me look at my tire purchase history for my last car and I did have the Continental ExtremeContact DWS for my X3 before. This was the set that I had before the CrossClimates. They were recommended by the independent mechanic I used to take it to. Reflecting back, they were a little better than the ProContacts on my MYLR but still less steering feel and grip than the CrossClimates. I would not buy them again.

Not trying to start an argument - it's great that you've had good experiences with Continental tires. I haven't liked them so far and I'm just sharing my experience.

Here's a snippet from my TireRack receipt in 2016. Smaller tires than the MYLR but that still seems cheap! An inflation calculator says that $145 in 2016 is $188 today.

 

[fhteagle]

Interesting, I wonder how that compares. You lost 5% range on a volt compared to Bridgestones, I wonder how similar those Bridgestones are to my Contis.

Yeah don't take my guess as scientifically accurate at all. There's just too many variables in my driving pattern, elevation/altitude, weather, load, battery degradation, etc. I'm guessing efficiency loss is around 5ish percent, I doubt it's 10, but don't make a purchase decision based solely on my guess.

 

[J-a-x]

I was referring to the ones he states that his car came with (same as my MYLR). But your comment made me look at my tire purchase history for my last car and I did have the Continental ExtremeContact DWS for my X3 before. This was the set that I had before the CrossClimates. They were recommended by the independent mechanic I used to take it to. Reflecting back, they were a little better than the ProContacts on my MYLR but still less steering feel and grip than the CrossClimates. I would not buy them again.

Not trying to start an argument - it's great that you've had good experiences with Continental tires. I haven't liked them so far and I'm just sharing my experience.

Here's a snippet from my TireRack receipt in 2016. Smaller tires than the MYLR but that still seems cheap! An inflation calculator says that $145 in 2016 is $188 today.

View attachment 1020171

Wow good price. My old mechanic from back when I drove an ICE quoted me $400 per tire for ProContact which is a lesser tire, Tesla quoted me $425 per tire (obviously Tesla's price is terrible), and Sullivan tire (local place here in Boston) quoted me $317 per tire.
Sullivan says $317 for ExtremeContact.

 

[tevman]

I know, I know, not another tire thread. But I've been searching for a while and I can't seem to answer all of my questions....

A little background: I drive a Model Y LR, 19" wheels in Boston. Yeah it snows here but not as much as most people think it does. each year I might end up driving in the snow 3 or 4 times, max. Lately we rarely get snow in the city, and when we do I just don't drive. I work form home so driving in the snow is not critical but it is nice to be safe when I end up doing it. Usually the snow is completely melted after a snowstorm within a few days, a week max. So not looking for the same tires I'd buy if I lived in Vermont for example.

My car came with Continental ProContact RX All-Season tires. I'm at 16k miles and I've forecasted that I'll need new tires before next winter, maybe somewhere around 30k miles. I'm keeping an eye on the tread depth. I like to plan in advance so thinking about which tires I'll get next. I find that the ProContact RX is not so great in snow, otherwise I don't have big complaints about them.

Here's what I'm. looking for:

• I want a tire that performs better in the snow, but it doesn't need to be fully snow optimized since I only drive in snow 3-4 times per year.
• I want all-season tires. I don't want to change my tires to snow tires just for those 3 or 4 snowy drives... so winter tires are out of the question. We can start another thread to discuss the merits of winter tires, I'm sure they have some benefits but the cost/benefit does not work for me.
• I want a new tire that also ideally maintains my current level of dry and wet braking, don't want to the new tires to be more dangerous during the 99% of time I spend driving in either dry or rainy conditions (again driving in snow happens but not often).
• I don't want to lose any range compared to what I have now. So the baseline is the ProContact RX on 19" wheels.

Tires I am considering are:

• Michelin Cross Climate
• Michelin Pilot Sport AS
• Continental ExtremeContact DWS

One problem I have doing research is I find so many people who say that every single tire I look at has a big efficiency losses compared to OEM tires, but everybody has different OEM tires and wheel sizes, so that doesn't mean much to me. Maybe their car came with summer tires for example and it's not a fair comparison unless you state which OEM tire you have. They also seem to only test the tires when new which is not a fair comparison since new tires will also decrease efficiency a bit.

From some of the reviews I've seen (for example Tire Rack and TyreReviews), the Cross Climate should have LOWER rolling resistance than any of the other options, so despite the aggressive tread pattern they seem to paradoxically be potentially better at efficiency? Not sure if I should trust this or nor and curious what other peoples experiences are.

For example see the two screenshots below, the Wh/Mi seems better for CrossClimate (263) vs ProContact which I have now (274). Does that seem accurate?
View attachment 1019820
View attachment 1019821

I've read more people complaining that Pilot Sports resulted in lost efficiency than Cross Climate which seems weird excuse Pilot Sport appears to have a less aggressive tread pattern, and I can't find any test data backing that up, only anecdotal stories comparing to OEM tires (but which OEM tire at how many miles?). Does anybody know if that makes sense that the Sport Pilot would be the most likely result in lower efficiency?

To Contradict that last statement, Sullivan Tire says that efficiency should be identical with ProContact, ExtremeContact, and CrossClimate but Pilot Sport is rated one better for efficiency! That goes against most of the anecdotal stories I'ver read.

View attachment 1019823

In the end I feel like I'm leaning towards the CrossClimate because its supposed to be hands down the best in snow, as good as my last tire in rain (or better according to Sullivan) and from the data above its at least the same, if not better than my current tires for efficiency. And the tread seems like it'll last longer, even in summer.

Does this sound like a reasonable decision? Does anybody have any other experiences that might help me choose one tire over the other here or pick a different one entirely?

Thanks in advance!

I've had the Michelin Cross Climate 2 full set on my 2022 Model Y-LR on the 19inch wheels for about 1 year now. I live in Colorado at 7500 ft with town at 6500 ft. We have snow up to 6 inches and ice, black ice and slush from about mid-December thru April. I've not had any loss of control although I've felt the car engage a bit of Electronic Traction Control which brings it right back into line. I also drive long road trips on freeways in dry to heavy rain without any problem. These tires seem to be a good match for the car and my driving conditions so I'll likely replace them with the same once tread gets down under 4/32. Cheers and safe driving.

 

[804son]

I recently bought the Michelin Cross Climate 2 for a Winter set on my Model 3. I've had a chance to test them in two different snow events. They handled very well and predictably. in Colorado we get the occasional snow, but like the OP stated, I too work from home when the weather is really bad. Colorado also has a considerable amount of time when the roads are just cold and dry. These tires seem to be a provide a good balance between snow performance and dry cold performance for me. I have a set of stick summer tires for fun in the summer

 

[MattM24]

I was referring to the ones he states that his car came with (same as my MYLR). But your comment made me look at my tire purchase history for my last car and I did have the Continental ExtremeContact DWS for my X3 before. This was the set that I had before the CrossClimates. They were recommended by the independent mechanic I used to take it to. Reflecting back, they were a little better than the ProContacts on my MYLR but still less steering feel and grip than the CrossClimates. I would not buy them again.

Not trying to start an argument - it's great that you've had good experiences with Continental tires. I haven't liked them so far and I'm just sharing my experience.

Here's a snippet from my TireRack receipt in 2016. Smaller tires than the MYLR but that still seems cheap! An inflation calculator says that $145 in 2016 is $188 today.

View attachment 1020171

I would assume $145 in 2016 was around a Billion Dollars today…

Also, these new tires are DWS06 Plus, which is a new version of the DWS06, which is a new version of the DWS.

 

[roadtripin]