Segment
1. Michelin CrossClimate 2 Premium2. Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21 Upper-middle
Comparison: Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21 vs. Michelin CrossClimate 2
Table of contents:
| # | Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21
| Michelin CrossClimate 2
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R14 - R20 | R15 - R21 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21 vs Michelin CrossClimate 2
Comparing the Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21 and the Michelin CrossClimate 2, we find a notable difference in test scores. While the Yokohama tyre scored 31% in our ratings, the Michelin tyre stands out with a significantly higher score of 94%.
The Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21 had some positive points such as satisfactory snow braking performance. However, its performance on dry roads, wet traction and winter performance were less impressive according to the ADAC 2016 test. Predicted mileage and abrasion were also areas where the Yokohama tyre showed weaknesses. Additionally, its weight is said to be on the higher side.
On the other hand, The Michelin CrossClimate 2 - an upgrade on the previous Michelin CrossClimate model, is not without its own flaws. Notably, it showed slight weaknesses on wet surfaces. However, the tyre more than compensated for this with secure and precise characteristics on both dry and winter surfaces. Its lower weight, lower fuel consumption, and best-in-test abrasion also make it stand out. In ADAC's test, the Michelin tyre took the 4th place out of 16 compared to the Yokohama, which came in the 14th position.
TyreReviews.com 2024's test highlighted that the Yokohama tyre had very high grip in snow and best ice braking but had low wet grip, long dry braking, and very high rolling resistance. The Michelin tyre's strengths included good dry grip, high resistance to aquaplaning, the best snow performance, the least noise and lowest rolling resistance in the test, even if it had longer wet braking.
At Autobild test, where 35 tyres were tested, Michelin CrossClimate 2 came in 2nd, leading the Yokohama tyre which fell to the 21st position. Their test results indicate excellent snowy and icy conditions handling, dynamic dry handling and high mileage for the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
In conclusion, while the Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21 might appeal to drivers who prioritize snow performance, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 ranks superior in several tests and provides a more well-rounded performance across different road conditions. Therefore the Michelin CrossClimate 2 generally stands out as the better all-round tyre in these tyre comparisons.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Michelin CrossClimate 2 Test winner2. Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21 Satisfactory
Worst rating in test
2. Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21 Satisfactory
Snow
(Overall rating)Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking according to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Comfort
(Overall rating)Outside noise accoring to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Points total | Rating | Enviromental impact | Driving safety | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 5.4 | velmi dobré | 1.8 | 2.3 | |||
| Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21 Rating: Satisfactory | 4 | uspokojivé | 3.3 | 4 | |||
| Michelin CrossClimate 2 Rating: Good | 2.7 | dobré | 2.2 | 2.9 | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21 | |||||||
| Michelin CrossClimate 2 Rating: Highly recommended | velmi doporučeno | ||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 37.7 | 45 | |||||
| Yokohama BluEarth-4S AW21 | 42.9 | 52.4 | |||||
| Michelin CrossClimate 2 | 37.7 | 47 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
