Michelin tire ratings

[edyvw]

This thread is very specifically about the UTQG traction test - and how one specific tire went from A to B.

The UTQG test is very specifically about wet traction.

Going further regarding Snow, ice and water.

Snow does not disperse - it compacts. Ice just "is" The traction on these surfaces has a lot to do about the rubber compound itself.

Water disperses, and if it doesn't its a lubricant. So if you want traction in the water you typically need to disperse the water, usually with both channels parallel and lateral to the direction of travel.

All other things being equal. So as I said, it depends. It is possible to have a snow tire work well in the rain, but not all snow tires do automatically.

When ut comes to snow tires, emphasizing ice traction is what messes up wet traction.
Both snow and ice traction is dependent on compound. But, when it comes to snow traction those zig zag opening are designed to trap snow and create snow on snow traction, which is key in good snow traction.
There are now excellent snow tires with really good wet traction. I have Blizzak WS90 on BMW and VW, and wet traction is excellent, much better than some A/S tires I had, DEFINITELY better than BFG Advantage L/T on Pilot.
I would say problem with poor wet traction in some of tires is trying to also improve some ice performance as for example BFG on Pilot are 3MPSF. But it is not true snow tire. So, again, problem is compromise in compound.
I drove CC2 on some cars, and they are really good tire. But, I didn’t drive long enough to make my judgment about wet performance. People think it is second coming, but it is IMO nothing but more successful compromise, and while it might be better than other compromises , it is still compromise.

 

[SC Maintenance]

When ut comes to snow tires, emphasizing ice traction is what messes up wet traction.
Both snow and ice traction is dependent on compound. But, when it comes to snow traction those zig zag opening are designed to trap snow and create snow on snow traction, which is key in good snow traction.
There are now excellent snow tires with really good wet traction. I have Blizzak WS90 on BMW and VW, and wet traction is excellent, much better than some A/S tires I had, DEFINITELY better than BFG Advantage L/T on Pilot.
I would say problem with poor wet traction in some of tires is trying to also improve some ice performance as for example BFG on Pilot are 3MPSF. But it is not true snow tire. So, again, problem is compromise in compound.
I drove CC2 on some cars, and they are really good tire. But, I didn’t drive long enough to make my judgment about wet performance. People think it is second coming, but it is IMO nothing but more successful compromise, and while it might be better than other compromises , it is still compromise.

OK.

How does anything I said contradict that?

 

[camrydriver111]

That's a good question.

When CC2 was released it was tested against outgoing CC1 and there is no drop in wet performance. At least for the Euro versions. Maybe the compound is harder for the US.

https://www.tyrereviews.com/Article/Michelin-CrossClimate-2-VS-Michelin-CrossClimate.htm

 

[edyvw]

OK.

How does anything I said contradict that?

The compound is the key. That is my point. You are talking about dispersing water. The problem is that you have tires that can disperse water very efficiently but handle horribly. From everything, among all-weather tires, they have superior traction. Trie Rack had several tests comparing them to other tires in its category, but also Pilot A/S4, PS4S, Defender2.

 

[Skippy722]

Are you talking traction or resistance to hydroplaning? Those are two different things. My BFG Advantage Sport L/T on Pilot have excellent resistance to hydroplaning, and absolutely horrible traction.

Even at the friggin wear bars I had to work really really hard to get either my KO2’s or my wife’s Advantage TA Sport LT’s to hydroplane.

Y’know, assuming I had enough traction to get going that fast.

 

[edyvw]

Even at the friggin wear bars I had to work really really hard to get either my KO2’s or my wife’s Advantage TA Sport LT’s to hydroplane.

Y’know, assuming I had enough traction to get going that fast.

Lol. The problem is when one gets a bit enthusiastic in wet on mountain roads, and then a sharp curve comes. Oh boy.

 

[Alien]

From another forum. Believe what you will.
I was reading the reviews for the Defender 2 tires this morning on the Michelin web site and ran into a review from someone expression the "B" rating for traction and this was the response from Michelin.
Consumer Care MIC US
"Sticks49, thanks for taking the time to submit a review on the Defender 2. We understand your concern and wanted to share a bit more information with you. The UTQG traction grade is a 40-year-old, locked-wheel wet braking test and is, in our estimation and in the estimation of the U.S. Tire Manufacturers Association, a method that is outdated and inconsistent because all modern vehicles have anti-lock brakes. A braking test based on anti-lock brakes measuring peak adherence rather than slide adherence, which is better suited for today’s vehicle. Michelin has chosen to design tires based on anti-lock braking, not locked-wheel braking. This sometimes produces a lower locked-wheel result, even though our testing and independent testing used in claims show the MICHELIN® Defender®2 tire to have superior wet braking over leading competitors. This question is an excellent one and highlights why regulation needs to be updated and/or eliminated as technology changes and improves. Our testing and independent testing show that consumers will be very pleased with the wet braking performance of the MICHELIN® Defender®2 tire, not only in when the tire is new, but even as it wears."

Michelin's explanation would be believable if they were actually getting better anti-lock test results with their B UTQG traction rated tires than their competitors get with their A rated tires. But at least with their Defender LTX M/S 2 tires they are not. In tests reported by Tire Rack and Discount Tire, Pirelli Scorpion Weatheractives beat the Michelins without sacrificing the UTQG A rating, while Falken Aklimates, Nitto Nomad Grapplers and Hankook Dynapro HTs achieved the same results as the Michelins without sacrificing the UTQG rating.

 

[Vercingetorix]

Seems the European CC2 doesn’t do well in wet braking in the latest Tyrereviews test.
https://www.tyrereviews.com/Article/Best-All-Season-Tyres-2024-2025.htm

 

[edyvw]

Michelin's explanation would be believable if they were actually getting better anti-lock test results with their B UTQG traction rated tires than their competitors get with their A rated tires. But at least with their Defender LTX M/S 2 tires they are not. In tests reported by Tire Rack and Discount Tire, Pirelli Scorpion Weatheractives beat the Michelins without sacrificing the UTQG A rating, while Falken Aklimates, Nitto Nomad Grapplers and Hankook Dynapro HTs achieved the same results as the Michelins without sacrificing the UTQG rating.

The big difference is that Michelin will perform very well at 20 or 30k miles. Those won't for sure.
Pirelli? Maybe, but till does not have performance retention as Michelin.

 

[Rand]

This might be relevant.

 

[BillyHW]

UTQG rating is a joke. M+S rating is a joke. 3PMS rating is also a joke (although many tires with 3PMS are very good in winter regardless). None of those rating standards is rigorous enough, modern enough, or scientific enough.