16 Month review of Continental Cross Contact LX-25

[Hermann]

Purchased Labor Day of 2023. Waited to review until we had a decent snow. There was no snow in the first winter that even needed a decent tire. Well we got a inch of ice with 12-14 inches on top a week ago. While not snow tires they have a 12/32nd tread depth. Backing out of the garage, the FWD Maverick went right through the foot of snow , through drifts in the driveway and into the street, which had a very minimalistic one pass plow. Went on several errands and encountered unplowed streets that were packed snow. Very good traction accelerating and braking on the hard packed snow. What impressed me most was traction in the gray slushy snow. In the Mavericks "slippery mode" the tires dug right in and moved me forward with minimal slippage in the gray stuff.

Overall these are really nice tires. Already knew of the comfort, the excellent wet performance and in the level of grip in the curves. Add to that the way above average snow performance, the LX-25's are winners in my book.

 

[Propflux01]

Had them on my former Tucson. I was very satisfied with them.

 

[Egg_Head]

Mavericks are available with front wheel drive (FWD)?

 

[cheesepuffs2]

Mavericks are available with front wheel drive (FWD)?

Yes, there's been a FWD powertrain and an AWD option since they launched.

 

[Hermann]

Yes, there's been a FWD powertrain and an AWD option since they launched. It's the hybrid that is AWD.

My Maverick is a hybrid and it's FWD. In the first three years Hybrid did not have a AWD option. Right now the Ecoboost 2.0L turbo is not available in FWD any longer. The turbo FWD was only available the first year.

 

[Rand]

Mavericks are available with front wheel drive (FWD)?

yes the desirable hybrid model was only FWD until this model year
Now hybrid is available with FWD or AWD.

But with the smilie I'm guessing you were making some sort of joke and referencing the classic car.

 

[IndyIan]

Yep, some new, higher profile, full tread depth all-seasons, do work pretty decent in snow. In a few years at 7-8/32? probably not so good IME, and un-usable in my situation.

 

[Rand]

Yep, some new, higher profile, full tread depth all-seasons, do work pretty decent in snow. In a few years at 7-8/32? probably not so good IME, and un-usable in my situation.

its unfortunate that they arent 3peak snowflake rated because they would easily pass.
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=268

 

[Egg_Head]

Yes, there's been a FWD powertrain and an AWD option since they launched.

To quote Johnny Carson, "I did not know that."

 

[RAVL]

With tires, you generally get what you pay for. Continental, Michelin, Bridgestone - all generally excellent in my experience but not inexpensive. It always amazes me that people don’t put more premium on the part of the car that actually interfaces with the road. (Not that there aren’t other good brands but they are not Chinese or other second and third line tires.). So many complaints of vibration, weird noise, tracking issues, premature wear, etc. would be resolved by car owners not using oversized or odd sized tires (and wheels) and using a quality tire. But a lot of folks just see the up front price, and that is a short sighted approach.

Thanks for the report!

 

[Subzero1]

Had them on a Equinox, loved those tires.

 

[Propflux01]

With tires, you generally get what you pay for. Continental, Michelin, Bridgestone - all generally excellent in my experience but not inexpensive. It always amazes me that people don’t put more premium on the part of the car that actually interfaces with the road. (Not that there aren’t other good brands but they are not Chinese or other second and third line tires.). So many complaints of vibration, weird noise, tracking issues, premature wear, etc. would be resolved by car owners not using oversized or odd sized tires (and wheels) and using a quality tire. But a lot of folks just see the up front price, and that is a short sighted approach.

Thanks for the report!

Price is a big consideration for some. People around that simply cannot afford anything more than the milestar or whatnot. Conti/mich/bridge usually cost around $1000 out the door. Gotta take the good and bad with what one can afford.

 

[RAVL]

O

Price is a big consideration for some. People around that simply cannot afford anything more than the milestar or whatnot. Conti/mich/bridge usually cost around $1000 out the door. Gotta take the good and bad with what one can afford.

I think most people will find that if you shop around you can get one of these brands for far less than you suggest, not always, but often.

 

[Propflux01]

O

I think most people will find that if you shop around you can get one of these brands for far less than you suggest, not always, but often.

Perhaps, but in the OP’s case, from tire rack, for his vehicle, a set of 4 is $671. Now add a $100 for mount and balance, and $65 for tax and you’re near that $1000. And in his case he’s using the more common 17” tire.

 

[RAVL]

Perhaps, but in the OP’s case, from tire rack, for his vehicle, a set of 4 is $671. Now add a $100 for mount and balance, and $65 for tax and you’re near that $1000. And in his case he’s using the more common 17” tire.

I understand your point but at the same time I recently put a set of 15 inches Toyos on one of the old BMWs for about 500 mounted and balanced. The issue is the size of the wheels - I often see people putting oversized wheels on a car for looks and then putting on some Chinese knock off tire. That type of thing is not economic necessity, it is plain old stupidity. now you do have people who are challenged financially but my guess is that they are not buying tires for a 17 inch wheel, at least not if they have a good sense of money.

The original poster drives a recent vintage Maverick, so he is not poor and all of this is academic but yes I am sure there some segment of the population that is coerced to be crappy tires.

 

[silveravant]

I understand your point but at the same time I recently put a set of 15 inches Toyos on one of the old BMWs for about 500 mounted and balanced. The issue is the size of the wheels - I often see people putting oversized wheels on a car for looks and then putting on some Chinese knock off tire. That type of thing is not economic necessity, it is plain old stupidity. now you do have people who are challenged financially but my guess is that they are not buying tires for a 17 inch wheel, at least not if they have a good sense of money.

The original poster drives a recent vintage Maverick, so he is not poor and all of this is academic but yes I am sure there some segment of the population that is coerced to be crappy tires.

Not a vintage Maverick, 2022 FWD hybrid.

 

[Hermann]

Perhaps, but in the OP’s case, from tire rack, for his vehicle, a set of 4 is $671. Now add a $100 for mount and balance, and $65 for tax and you’re near that $1000. And in his case he’s using the more common 17” tire.

My out the door price was mounted and balanced for $625 after $220 in rebates. So regular price would have been $850 or so

 

[Hermann]

Yep, some new, higher profile, full tread depth all-seasons, do work pretty decent in snow. In a few years at 7-8/32? probably not so good IME, and un-usable in my situation.

It has been 10+ years since I have had a foot of snow here on the east side of KC. In 1996 the first winter in my home, it snowed a lot. Seemed like all I did was shovel snow. The snow shovel I bought in late 1996 is still in use.

Right now the built-in tread depth indicator still has plenty of S showing. That's a nice feature. Didn't get the Michelin CC2's because they were much more expensive and reports of 10% fuel efficiency loss, steered me here. The Michelins were a $1050 all in back then. I'm very pleased and would recommend them to anyone whose use parameters are in this category.

 

[D1dad]

I got some 225/65/17 for $600 out the door and like them more than cc2s.