Michelin Agilis Crossclimate

[Jetronic]

Agilis are the cargo van line of Michelin tyres, but they have a CrossClimate version aswell. The tread is a lot chunkier, and on the Muchelin website they say this tyre has improved grip on grass and mud, which they don't claim for the normal CrossClimate version.

Downside is they are likely noisier and the speed rating is only R (H for some sizes). Upside is they get the highest wet traction rating on the EU tyre label.

Is anyone here useing these? I know it's not a true off road tyre, but anyone used it on soft ground like mud/sand or grass?

I've got the concept of a plan to make tour around Norway with the MG in the spring, next year or the year after, and thinking of getting the Agilis CrossClimate in 235/60R17C R for that, and winter use in Belgium after that.

 

[Hohn]

Never used one, but I"m pretty sure a hard-sidewall, hard-tread tire designed for on-road traction isn't going to be superb on mud/sand/grass.

Personally I would not be considering a tire like that outside of commercial vehicle applications. Personal tires IMHO need to be optimized more for performance that tread life. Commercial tires tend to put tread life over all to the detriment of grip.

 

[IndyFan]

Agilis are the cargo van line of Michelin tyres, but they have a CrossClimate version aswell. The tread is a lot chunkier, and on the Muchelin website they say this tyre has improved grip on grass and mud, which they don't claim for the normal CrossClimate version.

Downside is they are likely noisier and the speed rating is only R (H for some sizes). Upside is they get the highest wet traction rating on the EU tyre label.

Is anyone here useing these? I know it's not a true off road tyre, but anyone used it on soft ground like mud/sand or grass?

I've got the concept of a plan to make tour around Norway with the MG in the spring, next year or the year after, and thinking of getting the Agilis CrossClimate in 235/60R17C R for that, and winter use in Belgium after that.

I had a set on my Ford Transit 350 van. They were outstanding tires. IIRC I had them for maybe 20k miles. Wear seemed to be fine. But they were excellent in the wet and on snow and they were reasonably quiet. I never used them on anything more than wet grass and that van was terrible with traction on anything but the road, anyway, so I wouldn't evaluate a tire on grass or soft ground based on it.

 

[Jetronic]

Never used one, but I"m pretty sure a hard-sidewall, hard-tread tire designed for on-road traction isn't going to be superb on mud/sand/grass.

Personally I would not be considering a tire like that outside of commercial vehicle applications. Personal tires IMHO need to be optimized more for performance that tread life. Commercial tires tend to put tread life over all to the detriment of grip.

They market these expressly for high grip though, on snow, grass, mud and gravel and with more puncture protected sidewalls. I don't intend to off road, but we can't always see what's beneath the snow or in the mud (after the snow melts) or where the tarmac ends.

true off road tyres are not winter rated or any good on road either.

I know some forum users were considering these for their cars, but unsure if anyone actually got them.

found this review from someone who did a similar trip in similar conditions:

I fitted a set of Agilis CrossClimates to our motorhome for a trip to the North Cape in October/November. The base vehicle is a Mk8 Ford Transit and, fully loaded, the weight is around 3.6 - 3.7 tons. The chosen route was up the east coast of Sweden, then through the north west corner of Finland to the top of Norway. The return was down the west coast of Norway. Research suggested some snow was probable, with lots of single figure sub-zero temperatures and we should be away from the area before the real Arctic winter conditions set in.
The CrossClimates replaced a set of Goodyear summer tyres, which were the factory original fit. Initially they felt what I can only describe as a bit "floaty" at higher speeds (60mph), though this wasn't noticeable at lower speeds (say 40mph). I think they still do feel like that, but I've got used to it.
The snow started just north of Pitea; within 30 miles we were on hard packed snow and that was it for the rest of the way up. One day in Finland we covered around 230 miles on packed snow, with -6C being the maximum temperature. During the trip overall, we drove around 2000 miles on damp or wet roads at, or just above, freezing. We drove perhaps 1500 miles in conditions that were as bad as anything we are ever likely to see during a really severe UK winter; slush, snow, ice, temperatures down to -11C. The tyres were absolutely superb: they hauled us up 3rd gear hills, they steered around hairpin bends, they retarded our speed down "use low gear" hills. They never gave us a single scary moment, they rarely struggled for grip and it was readily restored with just a little bit less power. The worst we got was momentary significant understeer on a bend going up a mid-gear hill on a snowy & icy road. There was good feedback through the steering when the tyres were unhappy. The grip on ice exceeded my expectations; we stopped in a sloping car park that was so icy we could hardly stand. We got straight back into the motorhome and were able to drive away with only momentary wheel spin as we started to move.
As for more normal wet & dry conditions, we haven't had to test the limits of grip, but they never give any hint of a lack of grip. The level of comfort is good, similar to the previous summer tyres. There is a noticeable sound from the tyres on some road surfaces that we didn't get with the previous tyres; not loud, not unpleasant, just noticeable. After the 5500 miles of the trip, I was unable to measure any difference in tread depth with my basic tread depth gauge.
Overall, I was really impressed with the winter performance of these all-season tyres. They made the trip possible, they were safe, they took away the anxiety of driving in conditions that I haven't encountered in decades.

I used the original crosslimates on my car before, and they too felt very floaty at first, I'd say for about 1000 miles. My impression at the time was the tread blocks weren't quite stiff enough when they had the full depth, but these van tyres have about twice the block size (and the MG weighs about half of the transit above.

 

[Jetronic]

This is the type of conditions that are expected.

 

[Hohn]

They market these expressly for high grip though, on snow, grass, mud and gravel and with more puncture protected sidewalls. I don't intend to off road, but we can't always see what's beneath the snow or in the mud (after the snow melts) or where the tarmac ends.

true off road tyres are not winter rated or any good on road either.

I know some forum users were considering these for their cars, but unsure if anyone actually got them.

found this review from someone who did a similar trip in similar conditions:


I used the original crosslimates on my car before, and they too felt very floaty at first, I'd say for about 1000 miles. My impression at the time was the tread blocks weren't quite stiff enough when they had the full depth, but these van tyres have about twice the block size (and the MG weighs about half of the transit above.

Right, but there are tires well-suited to your purpose, based on the photographic depictions.

Personally, I'd steer you towards the Nokian Outpost series. For a van like vehicle, the APT seems like the right choice, and they offer it in 235/60r17. My recent experience with Nokians has been superb. They were a bit squirmy on grooved US interstates when new, but the combination of winter grip, ride quality and MPG was the best I've found to date. (albeit based on my experience with the WRG tire).

 

[Jetronic]

can't get the nokian in a suitable size

 

[Jetronic]

I had a set on my Ford Transit 350 van. They were outstanding tires. IIRC I had them for maybe 20k miles. Wear seemed to be fine. But they were excellent in the wet and on snow and they were reasonably quiet. I never used them on anything more than wet grass and that van was terrible with traction on anything but the road, anyway, so I wouldn't evaluate a tire on grass or soft ground based on it.

Where these with the typical crossclimate directional pattern? I noticed some pictures online that show a more traditional pattern aswell.

 

[johnmyster]

The euro-metric and lt-metric sizes of the agilis cross climate are two different animals. The c-metric is the directional tread, made in europe, and has a third steel belt in the tread section, affording the higher load ratings compared to the non-directional LT-metric load range E of the same size.

Like all things Michelin, they make it confusing by offering two tires with different origin, different tread, and different construction under the same name and sometimes the same size.

In north america, the LT-Metrics are marketed as light truck (and van) tires for on-road/highway applications with pretty good winter performance. The c-metrics are imported in the odd sizes and disproportionately high weight ratings typical of euro van application.

The directional c-metric is not 3 peaks winter/snow certified and had the recall issue in 2023 over that debacle.

I own eight of the 225/75R16-C 121/120R tires and they are a terrific tire for the intended application. If the directional tread isn't something you can tolerate, consider the Continental VanContact. If off-pavement traction is a concern and you don't need the higher durability, curb protection, and weight capacity, you can pick a better tire for the job.

I'm using them for our travel trailer and am delighted with them.

 

[Jetronic]

The euro-metric and lt-metric sizes of the agilis cross climate are two different animals. The c-metric is the directional tread, made in europe, and has a third steel belt in the tread section, affording the higher load ratings compared to the non-directional LT-metric load range E of the same size.

Like all things Michelin, they make it confusing by offering two tires with different origin, different tread, and different construction under the same name and sometimes the same size.

In north america, the LT-Metrics are marketed as light truck (and van) tires for on-road/highway applications with pretty good winter performance. The c-metrics are imported in the odd sizes and disproportionately high weight ratings typical of euro van application.

The directional c-metric is not 3 peaks winter/snow certified and had the recall issue in 2023 over that debacle.

I own six of the 225/75R16-C 121/120R tires and they are a terrific tire for the intended application. If the directional tread isn't something you can tolerate, consider the Continental VanContact. If off-pavement traction is a concern and you don't need the higher durability, curb protection, and weight capacity, you can pick a better tire for the job.

I will be using a different wheel and tyre when I don't need the durability, and winter grip.

 

[Jetronic]

The euro-metric and lt-metric sizes of the agilis cross climate are two different animals. The c-metric is the directional tread, made in europe, and has a third steel belt in the tread section, affording the higher load ratings compared to the non-directional LT-metric load range E of the same size.

Like all things Michelin, they make it confusing by offering two tires with different origin, different tread, and different construction under the same name and sometimes the same size.

In north america, the LT-Metrics are marketed as light truck (and van) tires for on-road/highway applications with pretty good winter performance. The c-metrics are imported in the odd sizes and disproportionately high weight ratings typical of euro van application.

The directional c-metric is not 3 peaks winter/snow certified and had the recall issue in 2023 over that debacle.

I own eight of the 225/75R16-C 121/120R tires and they are a terrific tire for the intended application. If the directional tread isn't something you can tolerate, consider the Continental VanContact. If off-pavement traction is a concern and you don't need the higher durability, curb protection, and weight capacity, you can pick a better tire for the job.

I'm using them for our travel trailer and am delighted with them.

confusingly the european offerings are 3pmsf rated, but the size I'm looking at is the largest offering, suitable for a sprinter van but not a truck.

 

[johnmyster]

I will be using a different wheel and tyre when I don't need the durability, and winter grip.

If you plan to use this as a winter tire, is the lack of 3PMSF rating not a concern for you?

confusingly the european offerings are 3pmsf rated, but the size I'm looking at is the largest offering, suitable for a sprinter van but not a truck.

Yes, like I said, Michelin has co-mingled various sizes of two different tires under the same model name. In North America, the US made non-directional LT-metric sizes cover a large range of pickup and light truck models. The c-metric directional european made models cover the euro-vans.

Might help if you post a link and/or photo to the specific model you're considering.

In europe, they market several Agilis van tires in c-metric van sizes (Agilis 3, Agilis Cross Climate, Agilis GreenX, and Agilis Camping) to make it more confusing. Only the CC makes it to the states.

 

[IndyFan]

Where these with the typical crossclimate directional pattern? I noticed some pictures online that show a more traditional pattern aswell.

They were not traditional. I bought them because I liked that directional tread pattern. That van had terrible traction in the snow and I bought that tire specifically to improve that, which they did and markedly so.

 

[Jetronic]

If you plan to use this as a winter tire, is the lack of 3PMSF rating not a concern for you?

Yes, like I said, Michelin has co-mingled various sizes of two different tires under the same model name. In North America, the US made non-directional LT-metric sizes cover a large range of pickup and light truck models. The c-metric directional european made models cover the euro-vans.

Might help if you post a link and/or photo to the specific model you're considering.

In europe, they market several Agilis van tires in c-metric van sizes (Agilis 3, Agilis Cross Climate, Agilis GreenX, and Agilis Camping) to make it more confusing. Only the CC makes it to the states.

https://www.michelin.be/nl/auto/tyres/michelin-agilis-crossclimate?tyreSize=17

235/60R17 is what I'm interested in. 3pmsf right there already in the size list

My winters are wet, more than snowy. Heavier siped tyres do a lot worse in the wet.

 

[johnmyster]

https://www.michelin.be/nl/auto/tyres/michelin-agilis-crossclimate?tyreSize=17

235/60R17 is what I'm interested in. 3pmsf right there already in the size list

My winters are wet, more than snowy. Heavier siped tyres do a lot worse in the wet.

Sure enough. That's the directional c-metric version.

Maybe they're allowed to certify the Europe-only sizes as 3PMSF. That particular size doesn't appear to come to North America.

I'm fuzzy on the details, but the de-certification/recall in north america had something to do with the pressure requirements for 3PMSF certification testing and differences between US requirements vs TUV. IIRC, they passed at one pressure but failed at the pressure required for LT tire certification in NA.

It's a great tire, but the appeal is in the additional weight capacity and durability aspects. I'm not sure it would be my top choice for a compact suv/crossover/wagon but perhaps in Europe, your options are different.

Does Michelin sell the P-metric Cross Climate in Europe?

 

[Jetronic]

Sure enough. That's the directional c-metric tire.

Maybe they're allowed to certify the europe-only sizes as 3PMSF. That particular size doesn't appear to come to North America.

I'm fuzzy on the details, but the de-certification/recall in north america had something to do with the pressure requirements for 3PMSF certification testing and differences between US requirements vs TUV. IIRC, they passed at one pressure but failed at the pressure required for LT tire certification in NA.

This is actually an oversized tyre for my car, the idea being in very bad conditions I can deflate it some temporarily and gain traction.

 

[johnmyster]

This is actually an oversized tyre for my car, the idea being in very bad conditions I can deflate it some temporarily and gain traction.

Beyond being slightly oversized, the tread is going to be very stiff given the third steel belt. I'm not sure that would be my direction if I wanted more traction under a light car.

In North America, it's the equivalent of putting Load Range E tires on a Subaru Outback.

 

[Jetronic]

Beyond being slightly oversized, the tread is going to be very stiff given the third steel belt. I'm not sure that would be my direction if I wanted more traction under a light car.

In North America, it's the equivalent of putting Load Range E tires on a Subaru Outback.

4400 pounds fully loaded, light is relative. I'm hoping deflating won't be necessary, it is another tool in the box. the vans that use these tyres top out at 7700 pounds fully loaded

 

[johnmyster]

4400 pounds fully loaded, light is relative. I'm hoping deflating won't be necessary, it is another tool in the box. the vans that use these tyres top out at 7700 pounds fully loaded

The 121 load index on my particular size indicates 3200 pounds per tire. My caravan is 4200 pounds per axle in traveling trim. Light is relative.

Last I checked, a Sprinter 250 has 5500 pound rear axle rating on two c-metric eurovan tires.

For you, 4400 pounds on 4 tires is not heavy for p-metric. The c-metric 117 load index you're looking at is 2800 pounds per tire.

 

[Jetronic]

The 121 load index on my particular size indicates 3200 pounds per tire. My caravan is 4200 pounds per axle in traveling trim. Light is relative.

Last I checked, a Sprinter 250 has 5500 pound rear axle rating on two c-metric eurovan tires.

For you, 4400 pounds on 4 tires is not heavy for p-metric. The c-metric 117 load index you're looking at is 2800 pounds per tire.

It's a while yet before I'm going to buy tyres. I'll keep an eye on what is available. So far my choices are limited.

The problem with the P-metric tyres is they have a tread that is much more likely to fill up with mud