Michelin Reviews & Comparisons

Both the Michelin X Ice Snow and the Sumitomo Ice Edge showcase exceptional winter performance, each emphasizing different features and setting distinct standards in grip, durability, and comfort, catering to a diverse array of driving requirements and circumstances.

Available Sizes

The Michelin X-Ice Snow comes in 125 total sizes in 15 to 22 inches. They have following specs.

• Speed ratings: T and H.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 10.5/32″ on all.
• Weight: 16 to 40 lbs.
• Tread warranty: 40k miles.

Review X-Ice Snow in greater details: https://snowytires.com/michelin-x-ice-snow-review/

On the other side, the Sumitomo Ice Edge comes in 14 to 20 inches with following.

• Speed ratings: T only.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 12/32″ on all.
• Weight: 16 to 33 lbs.

Tread Pattern

Starting with the Ice Edge, the tire is a meticulously engineered directional tire, a product of the esteemed Japanese manufacturer, Sumitomo.

The tread of this tire is distinguished by its five-rib pattern. Notably, compared to other winter tires, the lugs here are marginally more distanced, a feature that significantly enhances its self-cleaning capability.

The central (most) rib is populated by semi-triangular shaped lugs, enhanced with interlocking sipes and notches. These lugs are interconnected via robust longitudinal foundations, thereby delivering outstanding braking and acceleration performance.

The neighboring ribs are embedded with blocks that lean towards a squared-off form. Nonetheless, they also maintain substantial biting edges, complemented by stud holes.

The most aggressive elements of the tire, however, are the shoulder lugs. Their edges, adjoining the lateral tread voids, bear an intense serrated design. Consistent with the rest of the tire’s design, these blocks also incorporate wave-like siping and stud holes.

On the other side, the Michelin X-Ice Snow also features a unique, directional tread pattern.

This pattern is characterized by its 6 ribs, forming 5 longitudinal grooves.

Here the middle most groove is the narrowest, and is surrounded by blocks with snow vices, off-set edges and a mixture of interlocking and rectilinear siping.

While the surrounding lugs only carry wave-like siping, though they also have sharp edges to them.

All of these blocks also have reinforced foundations underneath, allowing for on-road stability.

Moving towards shoulder lugs, these are the most aggressive.

They carry thickest of all, siping, and their lateral sides are staggered.

Ice Performance

When it comes to performance on icy surfaces, the Michelin X-Ice Snow excels with its unique and intricate tread design featuring an amalgamation of different-sized angled slits and snow vices, setting a high standard in the industry.

The tire’s performance is further amplified by its aggressive siped pattern, which enhances braking distances and vehicle handling by providing additional biting edges, thus improving its grip on icy terrain.

However, the Sumitomo Ice Edge faces challenges under icy conditions due to its larger tread voids and fewer notches.

Its primary tread area struggles to maintain a firm grip on compacted ice, while the lack of multi-directional sipes diminishes its overall ice performance.

The Sumitomo Ice Edge does attempt to compensate by offering studdable lugs for enhanced traction on highly icy surfaces, but without studs, the Michelin X-Ice Snow continues to outperform on icy terrains.

Tread Life

The longevity of a tire’s tread life is largely influenced by the weight of the tire and its tread design.

And among the competitors, the Michelin X-Ice Snow is known for its excellent tread life, largely due to its lighter structure, which minimizes the force exerted on the rubber during contact with the road, thus prolonging tread wear.

On the other hand, the Sumitomo Ice Edge carries a heavier weight and a design with greater voids.

Consequently, this increased weight is distributed over a smaller surface area of rubber, causing each lug to endure higher pressure and leading to greater friction, thereby accelerating tread wear.

Hence, the Sumitomo Ice Edge tends to wear at a faster rate compared to its Michelin counterpart.

Dry Traction

Moving to dry conditions, the Michelin X-Ice Snow outperforms in terms of directional grip and handling, (which are the two key aspects of dry performance).

The tire’s directional grip is largely determined by the tread’s central area, where the Michelin offers a more streamlined lugs, providing consistent road contact for improved braking and acceleration.

Additionally, its handling, contingent on the tire’s shoulder design, is enhanced by closely spaced lateral voids that boost rubber-to-road contact during cornering.

Conversely, the Sumitomo Ice Edge, despite its wider grooves, carries additional weight that potentially induces lug movement during cornering, diminishing steering feedback and negatively affecting handling.

Thus, in dry conditions, the Michelin X-Ice Snow maintains its superior performance.

Snow Performance

Both tires demonstrate excellent performance in snowy conditions, each uniquely equipped to navigate diverse types of snow.

However, the Sumitomo Ice Edge edges ahead due to its assertive directional tread pattern, augmented by lugs with spacious structures that easily capture loose, fluffy snow particles.

Additionally, the tire’s numerous snow vices and interlocking grooves contribute to trapping snow, which provides better ground contact, given snow adheres more readily to itself than to rubber.

By comparison, Michelin X-Ice Snow’s design is more compact and lacks an interlocking groove structure, inhibiting its ability to collect as much snow as its competitor, and thereby somewhat compromising its snow performance.

Thus, Sumitomo Ice Edge holds an advantage in snow handling.

Wet Traction

The tire’s ability to grip on wet surfaces largely hinges on its tread design and rubber compound. These basically tell you about the two main parts of overall wet performance, namely wet grip, and resistance to hydroplaning.

Let me talk about both one after another.

Wet Gripping

So just like the dry, wet gripping also depends on how much rubber could meet the road. Though since water literally forms a layer in between, and disallows the tread to fully connect with the surface, you need to clear off water first.

And that is done by sipes and grooves.

Grooves channel a majority of water out, and provide hydroplaning resistance (I’ll talk about it later), and sipes deal with the rest of the water particles, you can say, dealing at a micro level.

These sipes work by sucking up water particles in their slits, and being more effective on Michelin X Ice Snow, you get a superior performance here.

The tire basically offers dual siping designs, with multi-angled orientations, and both these factors offer a superior overall grip, form all sides.

The Sumitomo on the other hand, lacks in gripping, though does better in the second part of overall wet traction, (see below).

Resistance to Hydroplaning

The Sumitomo Ice Edge shows exceptional hydroplaning resistance, boasting higher float speeds in both curved and straight aqua tests.

For folks who don’t know, float speed measures the tire’s speed over standing water.

And Sumitomo with wider tread voids, which are also interconnected with each other better, provide superior overall efficacy here.

So in essence, while Sumitomo Ice Edge proves superior in hydroplaning resistance, Michelin X-Ice Snow excels in wet grip performance.

Fuel Efficiency

The fuel efficiency of a tire is fundamentally linked to its traction and structural weight, both of which contribute to the tire’s rolling resistance.

Essentially, a heavier tire with larger tread voids results in more flexing or deformation of the tire lugs during cornering, braking, or acceleration.

This flexing process requires more energy, an attribute notably present in the Sumitomo Ice Edge.

Conversely, the Michelin X-Ice Snow, with its streamlined, longitudinally aligned ribs, significantly reduces rolling resistance.

As a result, it offers superior fuel efficiency, ensuring a greater distance traveled per gallon of fuel with the Michelin X-Ice Snow.

Ride Comfort

A tire’s ability to provide a comfortable ride balances several elements, including road noise, vibration dampening, tread pattern, and sidewall design.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow claims a minor edge in terms of road noise, thanks to its less-voided tread design, reducing the amount of air that can enter and circulate, thereby minimizing noise generation.

Additionally, its lighter structure improves response times, ensuring a smoother, more refined ride compared to its competitor.

On the contrary, while the Sumitomo Ice Edge may lack in noise reduction and smoothness, it excels in one area with its softer rubber compound.

This compound effectively absorbs road irregularities, offering a perceptible improvement in ride comfort compared to the Michelin X-Ice Snow.

Summing Up

Drawing conclusions from the key points, we can say that the Michelin X-Ice Snow demonstrates excellent performance on icy terrains and offers remarkable traction in dry conditions.

This is predominantly due to its intricate biting edges and continuous center rib.

Additionally, it shines in terms of fuel efficiency, thanks to its lighter weight and aerodynamic design.

Moreover, it outclasses its competitor in wet traction and noise reduction.

On the other hand, the Sumitomo Ice Edge excels in snow performance and vibration dampening, attributed to its open tread design and effective shock-absorption structure.

While its heavier weight might lead to more rapid tread wear and decreased fuel efficiency, its strong performance in snowy conditions and comfort on bumpy roads are worthy of mention.

In the end, choosing between these two tires would largely depend on the specific driving conditions and the individual preferences of the driver.

The Michelin X Ice Snow and General Altimax Arctic 12 both embody the epitome of winter tire technology, each with unique merits in performance, energy conservation, and ride ease, providing a multitude of options for various driver choices and road conditions.

Sizes Info

The Michelin X-Ice Snow (review) comes in 125 total sizes in 15 to 22 inches. They have following specs.

• Speed ratings: T and H.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 10.5/32″ on all.
• Weight: 16 to 40 lbs.
• Tread warranty: 40k miles.

On the other side, the General Altimax Arctic 12 (review) comes in 14 to 19 inches with following.

• Speed ratings: T only.
• Load ratings: XL only.
• Tread depth: 12/32″ on all.
• Weight: 16 to 35 lbs.

Tread Pattern

Starting with the General Altimax Arctic 12, the tire displays a blocky tread design with a directional pattern.

In this setup, the central lugs rest on a continuous secondary rubber layer beneath. These lugs possess multiple edges and are laden with a plethora of rectilinear sipes. Their arrow-shaped design also facilitates powerful in-groove notches.

The surrounding blocks are more substantial and exhibit wave-like siping along with stud holes. Just like the central blocks, they too possess sharp edges, and they have in-groove notches, though these are oriented towards the shoulder lugs.

As for the shoulder blocks, they run in pairs and are enveloped by the widest tread voids arranged laterally.

These studdable lugs are less aggressive and blocky, as they display minimal edges and are devoid of any notches. However, they do exhibit wave-like sipes.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow also exhibits a unique, directional tread pattern.

Its tread is characterized by four circumferential channels in the middle (not counting shoulder ribs).

So the central most area of the tread has a very tough passing interlocking, zigzag groove.

This circumferential channel is formed by lugs (of each side), having a mixture of straight and wave-like siping, off-set edges and snow vices.

(By snow vices, I mean, the stepped edges they have on corners).

Further out, you get more squared off blocks, with only wave-like sipes.

And on shoulders, you see aggressive thick siping slits, along with serrated edges seen on the lateral sides.

Ice Performance

Among tires designed for icy conditions, the Michelin X-Ice Snow distinctly stands out. Its exceptional performance is largely attributed to a distinctive tread design that includes multi-directional snow vices and angled incisions.

This configuration, augmented by an aggressive siping pattern, results in diminished braking distances and expedited handling times.

A noteworthy mention is the more pronounced sipes found on the Michelin X-Ice Snow, which lend it a stronger biting capability despite both tires featuring interlocking sipe designs.

In contrast, the General Altimax Arctic 12 appears somewhat ill-equipped for icy terrains due to its larger tread voids and lesser quantity of notches. The central tread area of this tire grapples with maintaining a strong grip on packed ice, and its lack of multi-angled sipes undermines its ice performance.

However, the provision of studdable lugs in the General Altimax Arctic 12 adds to its traction in extreme icy conditions. Nonetheless, in the absence of studs, the Michelin X-Ice Snow definitively rules the icy terrains.

Winner: Michelin X Ice

Dry Traction

When considering dry conditions, the Michelin X-Ice Snow surpasses in both directional grip and handling, the two critical components of overall dry performance.

The grip is predominantly influenced by the central tread area, where the Michelin X-Ice Snow sports a streamlined, continuous rib, ensuring a consistent contact patch with the road. This design facilitates more efficient braking and acceleration.

For handling, reliant on the shoulders of the tire, the Michelin X-Ice Snow features closely packed voids that maximize rubber-to-road contact during cornering.

Conversely, the General Altimax Arctic 12 falters with wider grooves and an increased weight that induces excessive lug movement during cornering, impairing steering feedback and overall handling. Hence, the Michelin X-Ice Snow holds the advantage in this domain.

Winner: Michelin X Ice

Tread Life

The life expectancy of a tire’s tread is significantly dictated by its rolling resistance, which is directly influenced by the tire’s weight and tread design.

It’s in this context that the lighter Michelin X-Ice Snow outclasses its rival in tread life longevity. Its lighter build decreases the pressure exerted by the tread against the road, thereby reducing friction and decelerating wear.

On the other hand, the heavier General Altimax Arctic 12 applies more weight over a smaller area due to larger tread gaps. This accelerates the wear rate and potentially shortens the overall lifespan of the tire.

Winner: Michelin X Ice

Wet Traction

Maintaining grip on wet surfaces is a critical attribute for any tire. This capability is predominantly determined by the tread pattern and the rubber’s texture.

While both tires are equipped with numerous tread voids that help disperse water and mitigate hydroplaning risk, the Michelin X-Ice Snow takes the lead.

It features an amalgamation of interlocking and straight sipes, efficiently channeling and absorbing water for superior wet traction.

This dense arrangement of sipes and a perfect blend of rigidity and flexibility afford an enhanced grip, especially during cornering.

While the General Altimax Arctic 12 does present laterally oriented sipes and impressive hydroplaning resistance due to its larger grooves, its overall wet grip does not compete with that of the Michelin X-Ice Snow.

Winner: Michelin X Ice

Snow Performance

In assessing the performance of tires under snowy conditions, both the General Altimax Arctic 12 and the Michelin X-Ice Snow demonstrate commendable capabilities, tailored to perform optimally even in challenging snowy terrains.

However, the General Altimax Arctic 12 displays a marginally better performance when navigating through fluffier snow, a terrain where it has previously struggled (particularly on ice and compact snow). This superior performance can be credited to its uniquely designed tread pattern, boasting wider lugs that foster snow-on-snow contact.

The larger voids within the General Altimax Arctic 12’s tread capture and retain snow particles more effectively, allowing the entrapped snow to establish better contact with the ground.

This characteristic capitalizes on the principle that snow adheres better to snow than it does to rubber, thereby enhancing traction.

In contrast, the Michelin X-Ice Snow sports a less aggressive, more enclosed tread design that’s less proficient at picking up snow, making it slightly less efficient in thicker snow conditions.

Winner: General Altimax

Comfort

The comfort levels provided by a tire are multi-factorial, with road noise and vibration absorption capacity playing key roles. Let’s delve into these factors to understand their impact on tire performance more comprehensively.

Road Quietness

Road noise, while often underappreciated, significantly influences the driving experience. It primarily stems from air particles colliding with the tire tread walls.

Consequently, reducing this noise forms an essential aspect of tire design.

In this respect, the Michelin X-Ice Snow shines, owing to its less voided tread design. By limiting voids, the tire reduces spaces where air can bounce, hence diminishing the noise generated during the tire’s contact with the road surface.

This strategic design consideration results in a quieter ride with the Michelin X-Ice Snow, thereby enhancing the overall ride comfort.

Conversely, with its larger tread voids, the General Altimax Arctic 12 allows for more air particle collisions, producing a somewhat noisier ride.

Winner: Michelin X Ice

On Road Vibrations

As the vehicle’s first line of defense against road surface inconsistencies, a tire essentially serves as a secondary suspension system. Therefore, a tire’s ability to efficiently absorb vibrations caused by surface imperfections significantly contributes to ride comfort.

In this aspect, the General Altimax Arctic 12 emerges as a clear winner, boasting exceptional vibration damping capabilities. This proficiency results from the tire’s unique tread design and compound composition, which grant it superior shock absorption capabilities.

When encountering uneven surfaces or obstacles, the General Altimax’s design provides effective cushioning, leading to a smoother ride and reduced transmission of vibrations to the vehicle’s chassis.

However, the Michelin X-Ice Snow trails slightly in this regard, with marginally less impact damping capabilities.

Winner: General Altimax

Summing Up

The final evaluation boils down to this:

The Michelin X-Ice Snow impresses with its stellar performance on icy surfaces and excellent dry traction, attributed to its meticulously crafted biting edges and continuous center rib.

Further, it offers superior fuel efficiency owing to its lighter weight and streamlined design. Additionally, the Michelin X-Ice Snow holds a slight advantage in wet traction and provides a quieter ride, thereby enhancing the overall driving comfort.

On the other hand, the General Altimax Arctic 12 stands out in snowy terrains, offering superior vibration absorption. This performance is largely due to its open tread pattern and effective shock-absorbing design.

Although the General Altimax Arctic 12 is heavier, leading to accelerated tread wear and less fuel efficiency, its performance on snow-laden terrains and comfort on uneven roads are noteworthy.

And if I talk overall, since, the Michelin X ICE is taking the lead in most, it can be seen as the better overall tire. Though make sure you also consider the price tag while selecting.

Both the Michelin X Ice Snow and the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4 are acclaimed performers in the winter tire landscape, each offering different strengths in handling, endurance, and ride comfort, thus providing numerous choices for different driver expectations and terrain demands.

Available Sizes

The Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4 (review) comes in 51 total sizes in 17 to 21 inches (with following specs).

• Speed ratings: H, V and W.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 10.5/32″ on all.
• Weight: 10 to 36 lbs.
• Tread warranty: 30k miles.

On the other hand, the Michelin X-Ice Snow (review) comes in 125 total sizes in 15 to 22 inches. They have following specs.

• Speed ratings: T and H.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 10.5/32″ on all.
• Weight: 16 to 40 lbs.
• Tread warranty: 40k miles.

Tread Pattern

Starting with the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4, the tire exhibits an asymmetrical tread design.

The tread pattern encompasses four main ribs in total, with the central one being continuous.

One side of this central rib presents a smooth and straight surface, void of edges, while the other side is serrated with the inclusion of sharp edges and notches. In addition, this rib is enriched with a mix of numerous sipes and slanted slits.

Moving along, the next rib visible on the tread, situated towards the serrated side of the central rib, covers the majority of the tread’s area.

This rib boasts chamfered outer edges and consists of a blend of rectilinear and interlocking siping, oriented at various angles.

You can also observe curving in-groove notches that run parallel to the lateral tread voids separating these blocks from one another.

As we shift towards the other side of the tire, we find things more closely packed. Nevertheless, you can still identify similar in-groove notches and longitudinal slits, although they do not divide the lugs.

On the other side, the Michelin X-Ice Snow also flaunts a unique, and directional tread design.

Its tread comprises four circumferential channels, emanating from four ribs in the very middle (though, there are total of six ribs, if you also count shoulders).

The narrowest, most challenging groove is positioned centrally and is crafted by two ribs that hold blocks adorned with multiple sharp edges, snow-vices, chamfered edges and a mixture of interlocking and rectilinear siping.

The surrounding blocks (further out), only carry wave-like sipes though, and don’t have as many biters.

And lastly the shoulder lugs are the most aggressive.

They carry thickest siping, and have sharp zigzag teeth on their lateral sides.

Comfort Levels

Tire comfort is primarily determined by road noise and vibration absorption.

Starting with road noise, which is essentially air particles colliding with the tire tread, the Michelin X-Ice Snow fares better due to its more closed tread design.

This restricts the free movement of air particles, reducing the force with which they hit the walls, and consequently decreasing the noise generated.

However, the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4 shines in the area of vibration absorption, exhibiting superior settling abilities.

Hence, both tires perform admirably in terms of comfort.

Winner: Michelin Alpin PA4

Tread Life

The tread life of a tire is greatly affected by rolling resistance, and in this aspect, the Michelin X-Ice Snow stands tall. Its lighter weight exerts less pressure on its lugs as they rub against the road.

On the flip side, the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4, with its slightly larger average weight and wider grooves, subjects each lug to substantial pressure as it rolls.

This leads to excessive heat, which in turn increases rolling resistance and accelerates rubber wear.

But here the difference between the two tires, is so low, that I wouldn’t rate one over the other still. That’s why it makes sense, why both tires offer you with 40k miles warranty.

Winner: Both!

Snow Performance

The commendable performance by both boys here, in varying snowy conditions is nothing short of impressive, with each yielding very similar outcomes.

However, a decision favoring one over the other has to be made and for this, I’d lean towards the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4, as this tire still demonstrates a slight superiority, notably on fluffy snow surfaces.

Let me explain why.

So this tire basically, comes with a more aggressive array of biters, prominently dispersed over its asymmetric tread, which allows for enhanced snow-to-snow contact.

This design enables fluffy snow to be effectively trapped within the tire’s interlocking grooves and snow-vices, facilitating a stronger ground contact with the captured snow.

This inventive design boosts traction since snow typically adheres more effectively to other snowflakes than it does to rubber.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow, featuring a relatively more crowded lug design, falls short of delivering similar outcomes. Consequently, the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4 emerges as the superior choice in snowy conditions.

Winner: Michelin Alpin PA4

Wet Traction

The wet traction of a tire is largely determined by its tread design and the rubber compound used. These factors reveal the tire’s gripping and hydroplaning resistance capabilities. Let’s dissect these elements individually.

Wet Grip

The Michelin X-Ice Snow emerges as the winner in terms of wet grip.

The tire exhibits quicker braking by 5 feet and outperforms by a solid 2 seconds in handling during lap tests.

The secret lies in its thermally adaptive softer rubber compound and more flexible lugs, which allows its sipes to generate improved suction for incoming water particles. Its multi-angled siping provides grip in all directions.

In contrast, the Michelin Pilot Alpin’s angled sipes lack comparable flexibility.

This results in the X-Ice Snow outshining its competitor in wet grip performance, although it lags slightly in hydroplaning resistance.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

Hydroplaning

Hydroplaning is a condition where the tire tread loses contact with the road due to a water layer buildup, causing the tire to skid over water. It typically occurs in wet or rainy conditions when significant standing water is present on the road.

The Pilot Alpin PA4 shines in this category, particularly during cornering.

Two different tests, namely, straight and curved aqua tests, were conducted to measure this.

And although there’s only a slight difference between both tires in straight-line hydroplaning, the Pilot Alpin PA4 pulls ahead significantly in the curved test, underscoring its impressive hydroplaning performance.

Winner: Michelin Alpin PA4

Ice Performance

In icy conditions, the Michelin X-Ice Snow outperforms its competitor, showcasing superior braking abilities with an improved average braking distance. Wondering why it stops and accelerates faster, as indicated by test results? It’s largely due to its meticulously crafted tread features.

Equipped with a central area boasting slanted incisions and snow vices, alongside dual angled siping, the Michelin X-Ice Snow exhibits remarkable biting abilities. This tire markedly surpasses its predecessor in performance over icy terrains.

Conversely, the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4, endowed with larger tread voids and fewer notches, doesn’t fare as well.

The central tread area, critical for efficient braking, faces challenges in securing a firm grip on compact ice due to its wider lateral tread voids.

Its larger lugs inhibit flexibility, preventing the biters from effectively gripping the icy surface.

And its angled sipes lack sufficient depth and flexibility to effectively bite into ice compared to its rival, leaving the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4 trailing in the icy performance test against its counterpart.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

Dry Traction

Dry traction is assessed based on two critical aspects: directional grip and lateral traction. Let’s break them down individually.

Directional Grip

This aspect gauges a tire’s grip as it rolls straight, placing significant importance on the middle section of the tire.

In this regard, the Michelin X-Ice Snow does better (very marginally), owing to its slightly more streamlined structure and central area (of interlocking lugs), which together facilitate faster braking and acceleration.

Conversely, the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4 falls short due to its broader grooves and asymmetric design, which are less optimal for straight rolling, such as on highways.

Though since the difference is only 0.2 feet, I am going to tie this round.

Winner: Both!

Lateral Traction

Lateral traction, the sideways grip of a tire, hinges on two metrics: the contact patch and the rubber composition.

A close examination of these two factors reveals the shortcomings of the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA4.

Its broader grooves don’t provide sufficient ground contact, and under larger weight, its lugs bend more while cornering.

This leads to oversteering and understeering, resulting in delayed steering feedback.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

Summing Up

To sum it all up, the Michelin Alpin PA4 shines in fluffy snowy conditions, while the X-Ice Snow outclasses its rival on compact snow and ice, offering shorter braking distances and superior handling times.

On both dry and wet surfaces, the Michelin X-Ice Snow holds the reins, despite the Pilot Alpin PA4 showcasing exceptional hydroplaning resistance.

Other than this, the X Ice offers you a more fuel efficient option, and lasts longer too, though the overall comfort levels are better on its competitor.

Actually, its usually the case, where you compromise a little on comfort, you get better fuel efficiency, and vice versa.

And yes, as fuel is tied to rolling resistance, which is mostly directly proportional to treadwear, (in case of winter tires, for the most part), it also affects overall tread life.

Michelin X Ice Snow and Goodyear WinterCommand Ultra, both being highly rated winter tires, outshine in different segments, setting new paradigms in performance, energy efficiency, and ride tranquility, providing an array of alternatives to suit different user choices and driving scenarios.

Available Sizes

The Michelin X-Ice Snow (review) comes in 125 total sizes in 15 to 22 inches. They have following specs.

• Speed ratings: T and H.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 10.5/32″ on all.
• Weight: 16 to 40 lbs.
• Tread warranty: 40k miles.

On the other side, the Goodyear WinterCommand Ultra (review) comes in 15 to 18 inches with following.

• Speed ratings: H only.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 11/32″ on all.
• Weight: 18 to 28 lbs.
• Tread warranty: None.

Tread Pattern

Starting with the Goodyear WinterCommand Ultra, the tire is characterized by a three-rib design.

At the center, the lugs may seem divided due to the presence of in-groove notches, as these incisions do not penetrate their full depth.

These lugs integrate smoothly with the adjacent blocks, creating a distinctive V-shaped pattern.

These blocks are further enhanced with an abundance of laterally positioned, interlocking sipes.

Moreover, the presence of numerous in-groove biters is evident, with the lugs separated by sinuous lateral grooves as well as longitudinal channels that cut across the shoulders.

The shoulder blocks are notably the most substantial.

Despite their sharp chamfered edges, they maintain a siping pattern consistent with the central lugs.

Of particular interest are the unique T-shaped biters found at the outer edges, or the sidewalls, as they might be referred to.

Moving on towards the Michelin X Ice Snow, you see another directional tread design.

Its tread is formed by 6 total ribs.

The narrowest and hardest to negotiate groove is centrally located, created by two ribs featuring blocks with multiple keen edges, wavy sipes, and chamfered sides.

Smaller, similarly designed lugs encircle these central features but are spaced more generously.

All blocks interconnect on a secondary rubber layer, lending stability to the lugs as the tire navigates.

The shoulder blocks bear somewhat softer edges, a squared-off look, and sport lateral rectilinear sipes and notches on their outer boundaries.

And yes, they also get the thickest of all siping (of rectilinear design).

Snow Performance

When it comes to handling in snow, both tires perform well. However, the Goodyear tire does have a small advantage, as seen after considering all.

But why is this so?

Well, if you look at its design, you’ll see it has wider gaps and notches in its tread that catch and hold snow. This design feature is important because snow sticks better to snow than it does to rubber, helping the tire get a good grip.

Moreover, the this tire has a special V-shaped lug design that helps push snow away and drive the tire forward, allowing for slightly quicker acceleration.

On the other hand, the Michelin X-Ice Snow tire performs a little less well in these conditions due to its tread design, which includes a continuous center rib and narrower notches.

Winner: Goodyear WinterCommand Ultra

Ice Performance

When it comes to ice, however, the Michelin X-Ice Snow tire takes the lead. In tests, it consistently stopped 11 feet shorter than the Goodyear tire.

It also has a slight advantage in acceleration, being one second quicker in the 0-40 mph test.

This superior performance is due to the unique biting edges distributed across the tread and the dual-angled design which enhances grip on densely packed snow surfaces.

On the other hand, the Goodyear WinterCommand Ultra tire struggles a bit on ice because of its wider tread gaps and fewer biting edges.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

Wet Traction

Traction on wet surfaces is heavily influenced by two key elements: the tread design and the type of rubber compound utilized. These factors affect the grip and resistance to hydroplaning, so let’s talk about them both.

Now when it comes to grip, both tires put up a strong fight in this department, thanks to their ample siping and use of soft tread rubbers.

However, the Michelin X-Ice Snow tire manages to carve out an edge.

This superiority is attributable to its clever mix of linear and interlocking sipes that are capable of absorbing water and providing an exceptional wet grip.

Furthermore, their multi-angled design bolsters cornering and braking abilities, especially when the sipes align with the direction of the tire’s motion.

In contrast, the Goodyear WinterCommand Ultra primarily employs laterally oriented sipes, which fall short in providing comparable overall traction.

Consequently, it often displays longer wet braking distances and handling times.

However, this tire does outperform in hydroplaning resistance, a key component of overall wet traction. Its V-shaped lugs excel in clearing water, enabling higher average float speeds in both straight and curved aquaplaning tests.

Winner: Both!

Dry Traction

Dry traction is dependent on the tire’s overall ground contact and can be split into two components: directional grip and lateral traction.

In both categories, the Michelin X-Ice Snow tire outperforms its Goodyear counterpart. Its continuous central rib ensures dependable and consistent road contact, resulting in shorter braking distances and quicker acceleration times during tests.

The Goodyear WinterCommand Ultra, however, makes a comeback when it comes to dry handling.

Even though both tires showcase similar shoulder footprints in contact with the road surface, the Goodyear tire makes the most of its rubber’s contact, delivering superior performance.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow.

Comfort Levels

Tire comfort is primarily determined by factors like road noise generation and vibration absorption capabilities.

These attributes can vary based on the tire’s construction, the materials used, the tread design, and the configuration of the sidewalls.

In this respect, both tires offer a remarkably similar performance.

They provide a supremely smooth ride and are impressively adept at cushioning against road bumps.

Moreover, both tires exhibit comparable noise reduction abilities, a critical factor since noise is mainly produced when the air particles collide with the tire’s tread walls.

Winner: Both!

Fuel Economy

Factors such as the tire’s adherence to the road surface and the overall tread pattern significantly influence fuel consumption. In light of these considerations, it’s evident that the Michelin X-Ice Snow tire delivers superior overall performance.

Its longitudinally aligned central rib translates to a more streamlined tread design, promoting better, straighter rolling of the tire. This design leads to decreased overall rolling resistance, thereby consuming less fuel.

On the other hand, the Goodyear WinterCommand Ultra’s directional tread pattern featuring lateral tread voids poses more challenges as the tire rolls.

This results in increased overall rolling resistance, leading to more fuel consumption.

Winner: Goodyear WinterCommand Ultra

Verdict?

Upon a thorough comparison of these two stellar winter tires, it’s clear that each brings unique strengths to the table.

The Goodyear tire excels in deep snow conditions, thanks to its wider tread voids and notches, as well as V-shaped lugs for unmatched snow displacement. Moreover, it exhibits impressive lateral traction on dry roads.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow, on the other hand, showcases superior traction capabilities on icy terrain, owing to its abundance of biting edges and varied incisions.

Additionally, it offers better braking and handling efficiency on wet roads and edges out slightly in terms of fuel economy.

In the domain of comfort, however, both tires are evenly matched, delivering equally outstanding performances.

Both the Michelin X Ice Snow and Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 are distinguished performers in winter tire technology, each specializing in different aspects of grip, tire longevity, and ride comfort, providing a variety of choices for a range of driver expectations and driving environments.

Available Sizes Info

The Michelin X-Ice Snow (review) comes in 125 total sizes in 15 to 22 inches. They have following specs.

• Speed ratings: T and H.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 10.5/32″ on all.
• Weight: 16 to 40 lbs.
• Tread warranty: 40k miles.

On the other side, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 comes in 14 to 20 inches with following.

• Speed ratings: R and T.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 11.5/32″
• Weight: 15 to 35 lbs.
• Tread warranty: None.

Tread Design

Starting with the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5, the tire while also boasting a directional tread pattern, presents a distinctly different design.

In the central area, there is a continuous rib, much like what you would find in its competition. This rib is intricately structured with numerous in-groove notches and particularly aggressive wave-like sipes.

The lugs that surround this rib have a blocky, squared-off design, though they mimic the central siping pattern. As you move further outward, you’ll notice the lugs becoming increasingly elongated, resulting in the shoulder blocks being the most elongated.

These shoulder lugs display saw-toothed edges on both lateral sides, and their siping pattern is slightly thicker.

It’s important to note that all the lugs, including the central ones, are seated on a secondary rubber layer beneath, serving as reinforced foundations.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow, on the other side, also proudly presents a distinctive, directional tread design.

This tread design features four circumferential channels centrally located, exclusive of the shoulder ribs.

At the core of the tread lies a challenging interlocking, zigzag groove, contributing to its tough nature.

This central channel is shaped by lugs on each side, endowed with a combination of straight and wave-like siping, offset edges, and snow vices. These snow vices refer to the stepped edges located on the corners of the lugs.

Moving outward from the center, the tread transitions to more squared-off blocks, each bearing only wave-like sipes.

The shoulder areas of the tread are characterized by robust, thick siping slits, complemented by the serrated edges visible on the lateral sides.

Comfort Levels

Ride comfort can be distilled down to noise dampening and shock absorption capacity of the tire.

Let’s start with noise, which is primarily generated when air particles collide with the tread walls. So, wider tread gaps result in a louder tire.

That’s why here the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 is taking the lead with it’s compacted up tread pattern.

Moreover, the tire also offers superior pitch sequencing technology. This approach utilizes variations in tread block geometry to generate different tones which cancel each other out, reducing noise.

Meanwhile, the Michelin X-Ice Snow excels in vibration dampening, courtesy of its softer overall tread compound. The softer tread construction improves shock absorption, leading to a smoother ride.

Winner: Both!

Tread Mileage

Tread longevity hinges on a mix of factors like the tire’s weight, tread depth, design, and material composition. In light of these factors, the Michelin X-Ice Snow shines.

This tire is lighter, so there is less weight stress on each lug, which reduces friction against the road surface.

Additionally, the tire’s relatively stiffer rubber prolongs the tire’s life, as it takes longer to wear down to replacement levels.

In comparison, although the Nokian tire also offers a decent tread life, thanks to its larger tread depth, it still falls short compared to its counterpart.

That’s why it makes sense why Michelin offers 40k miles warranty here, whereas Nokian doesn’t come with any.

Winner: Michelin.

Fuel Usage

Fuel efficiency in tires is closely tied to tread design and weight, as these factors tell you about the overall rolling resistance, (which directly impacts fuel usage).

Having said that, both tires here, offer comparable rolling resistance levels, meaning, you can’t put one tire over the other here.

Although the Michelin X-Ice Snow is lighter and has wider tread voids which would create additional lug movement during maneuvers, leading to increased fuel usage, its only equal to that seen on its counterpart, which is heavier (pushing its lugs against the road with greater force).

Winner: Both!

Fluffy Snow Traction

In softer snowy conditions, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 takes a slight lead, and this is attributed to its comprehensive array of biters that act as snow traps.

These snow traps foster robust snow-to-snow interaction, forming the tire’s contact patch with the ground and boosting traction. The reason being that snow bonds better to itself than to rubber.

Moreover, the tire’s streamlined and curvilinear tread pattern enhances performance by creating a paddling effect that scoops and ejects snow, driving the vehicle forward.

In comparison, the Michelin X-Ice Snow lacks these specific traits.

While its tread pattern is also directional, it lacks the streamlined pattern, as seen on its competitor, thus decreasing its ability to move snow backwards to generate forward momentum.

And yes, this combined with the fact that this tire has fewer interconnected tread voids than its competitor, it makes sense why Nokian is taking the lead here.

Winner: Nokian.

Wet Grip

In terms of wet grip, both tires benefit from abundant siping and flexible tread rubber, offering excellent directional grip.

And here, our testing reveals similar braking distances for both tires, demonstrating comparable wet grip.

However, the Michelin X-Ice Snow outperforms slightly in terms of handling, owing to its superior water clearance capabilities. This advantage is a result of multi-angled sipes and notches oriented both laterally and longitudinally on its shoulders.

This design fosters all-directional grip during cornering, mitigating slippage risk.

Conversely, the Hakkapeliitta R5, featuring only laterally oriented sipes on its shoulders, exhibits minor deficits in overall handling times during testing.

Winner: Michelin.

Directional Grip

Directional grip effectiveness primarily relies on the tread’s central zone, as it shoulders most of the tire load, particularly during straight-line driving on highways.

And given this parameter, it’s clear why the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 gets to have the upper hand.

While both tires feature continuous central ribs for persistent road contact, the Hakkapeliitta R5 features a more enclosed pattern, extending even to the peripheral lugs.

This attribute contributes to an average braking distance reduction of 4 feet in tests, outperforming the Michelin X-Ice Snow.

Winner: Nokian.

Lateral Traction

Handling quality largely depends on the tire’s shoulders and overall weight.

During cornering, inertia shifts the weight to the tread’s periphery.

Despite the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5’s closely packed shoulder voids, its heavier weight proves a setback.

The increased weight results in elevated lug movement when cornering, thereby diminishing steering feedback.

In contrast, the lighter Michelin X-Ice Snow maintains a better balance between understeering and oversteering, enhancing overall steering responsiveness.

Winner: Michelin.

Ice Traction

Regarding performance on icy surfaces, the Michelin X-Ice Snow indisputably leads the pack.

This tire features innovative design components, including dedicated biters scattered across the tread equipped with snow vices.

Coupled with a diverse range of siping angles, the Michelin X-Ice Snow provides impressive braking and acceleration capabilities on icy surfaces.

On the other hand, despite featuring numerous in-groove notches, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 lacks an assertive siping pattern.

Although its sipes interlock, they accommodate fewer biters and lack the diversity of angles present in the Michelin X-Ice Snow, resulting in a compromised grip on ice.

Winner: Michelin.

Summing Up

So lets see what it all comes down to.

The Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 demonstrates prowess on snowy terrains with its comprehensive snow traps and streamlined tread design, offering superior snow traction. It also provides better directional traction on both wet and dry roads.

On the other hand, the Michelin X-Ice Snow excels on icy terrains, courtesy of its specialized biters and all-directional grip.

Moreover, this tire also delivers superior handling performance in both wet and dry conditions.