Michelin Reviews & Comparisons

Both the Michelin X Ice Snow and the Nokian Nordman 7 shine in the winter tire category, each mastering different domains of performance, efficiency, and smoothness, thus giving a wide gamut of choices for different user predilections and roadway 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 Nokian Nordman 7 (review) comes in 34 sizes in 13 to 17 inches rims, with following specs.

• Speed ratings: T only.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 13/32″ on all.
• Weight: 15 to 27 lbs.
• Tread warranty: None.

Tread Pattern

Starting with the Nokian Nordman 7, the tire while boasting a somewhat intricate design, maintains its directional quality.

The central region of the tire is particularly intriguing, hence our discussion commences from this point.

Here, you’ll find two ribs, with the middle one almost forming a continuous line.

The central rib mimics a vine densely populated with thick leaves, where each lug presents hefty in-groove notches.

These lugs further stand out due to their biting edges and an abundant array of siping.

The surrounding lugs continue this pattern, but they additionally showcase sharp, off-set edges.

As we move towards the shoulders, the design becomes more streamlined. Slanted lugs make an appearance, richly imbued with tread features such as multiple siping designs, off-set edges, and stud holes.

Alternatively, the Michelin X-Ice Snow also shows up with a distinct and directional tread pattern.

Four circumferential indentations are constructed from four ribs, which are subdivided into six.

The central groove, being the most narrow and complex, is composed of two ribs embedded with blocks filled with multiple sharp edges, wave-sipes, and chamfered sides.

The surrounding lugs are of a similar design but are spaced more broadly and are lesser in size.

All the blocks, inclusive of the shoulders, are interconnected on a base layer of rubber, providing stability as the tire turns.

The shoulder blocks possess slightly milder edges, a mildly squared shape, and have rectilinear lateral sipes and notches on their edges.

Wet Performance

Tire grip on wet surfaces heavily relies on the number of grooves or sipes a tire has, as well as the ability of the tread rubber to absorb water.

Despite both tires featuring ample grooves to displace water and prevent hydroplaning, the Michelin X-Ice Snow slightly outperforms.

This tire incorporates diverse types of sipes adept at absorbing and channeling water, enhancing its grip on damp roads.

The presence of numerous tightly-packed, sturdy yet flexible sipes bolsters its performance around corners.

Conversely, the Nokian Nordman 7, though not lagging far behind, exhibits less aggressive siping and a stiffer rubber compound.

Winner: Michelin.

Snow Grip

In snowy conditions, the Nokian Nordman 7 takes the lead, particularly when navigating light, fluffy snow, (although it falls short on icy or compacted snow, which I’ll talk about in its separate section).

This superior performance can be attributed to its tread design, featuring abundant in-groove notches and voids which act as snow trappers, thus enhancing ground contact via the captured snow.

This is due to snow’s better adherence to itself than to rubber.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow, with its less spacious and simpler tread design, fails to offer as effective snow-to-snow contact, especially in heavy snow.

Winner: Nokian.

Vibration Dampening

Tires serve as the vehicle’s initial barrier against road irregularities, effectively acting as supplementary suspension systems.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow takes the lead in this aspect with its innovative tread compound. This compound adeptly manages uneven surfaces, absorbing road disturbances and delivering a remarkably smoother ride.

Conversely, while the Nordman 7’s stiffer rubber falls short in this aspect, though it excels in ride quietness, which is also a great contributing part to overall ride comfort.

Winner: Michelin.

Noise Generation

Tire noise primarily emanates from two sources. One, air colliding with the tread walls (mainly entering through shoulder voids) and, and two, in-groove resonance caused by echoing noise within the tread.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow, with its closed-up shoulder voids, restricts air entry.

However, its softer rubber exacerbates in-groove resonance, making it comparatively louder.

In contrast, the Nokian Nordman 7 manages to be quieter thanks to its superior pitch sequencing technology.

This technology modifies the tread block geometry, causing various tones to be produced as air particles collide with the tread. These different tones then work to cancel each other out, reducing overall noise.

Winner: Nokian.

Ice Traction

On ice-clad surfaces where numerous tiny “biters” are crucial, the Michelin X-Ice Snow shines, courtesy of its angled slits and multi-directional snow vices.

Alongside the tire’s more robust siping, these elements facilitate faster braking and enhanced handling.

The tire’s multi-angled sipes further augment grip in every direction, significantly boosting traction.

The Nokian Nordman 7, however, lags behind due to its wider tread gaps and limited notches, and its less aggressive siping pattern means fewer “teeth” biting into the ice.

Winner: Michelin.

Dry Gripping

The efficacy of the directional grip hinges predominantly on the central tread area where the majority of the tire’s load is concentrated during linear cruising.

Keeping this in mind, the Nokian Nordman 7 offers superior performance. Both tires exhibit continuous central ribs that maintain constant road contact, but the Nordman 7 edges ahead with its more cohesive pattern extending to the surrounding lugs.

This results in a noteworthy reduction in braking distance, by an average of 4 feet in tests, compared to its counterpart.

Winner: Nokian.

Dry Handling

The tire’s ability to handle or maintain lateral grip depends largely on the shoulder lug design and overall tread flexibility.

Consequently, both tires showcase comparable lateral g-forces and lap times during testing.

Both present similar shoulder footprints, ensuring nearly identical contact patches, and exhibit comparable steering response and susceptibility to oversteering and understeering.

Winner: Both!

Tread and Fuel Usage

The relationship between tread life and fuel economy primarily hinges on rolling resistance, significantly influenced by the tire’s weight, tread composition, and design.

In terms of fuel efficiency, the Michelin X-Ice Snow emerges superior, due to its more streamlined lugs and less aggressive tread voids, particularly centrally. This allows for a smoother, uninterrupted central rib, minimizing obstacles during linear rolling and thus enhancing fuel economy.

However, when considering tread life, the Nokian Nordman 7 excels, thanks to its harder tread compound and deeper tread.

Tread life is shaped by two factors: rubber wear rate and the time taken to reach a critical wear level. Benefiting from lighter weight and a tougher rubber compound, the Nordman 7 resists wear more effectively.

Its deeper tread implies a longer duration to reach the legally required 2/32″ tread depth, hence extending its lifespan.

Winner: Michelin in terms of fuel, and Nordman in terms of tread life.

To Sum Up

This rigorous comparison has highlighted the strengths of both tires, each outperforming in different categories.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow excels with superior wet traction, vibration dampening, and ice performance, whereas the Nordman 7 dominates in snow performance, noise reduction, and dry traction.

Intriguingly, both tires present stiff competition in dry handling. Moreover, while Michelin X-Ice Snow excels in fuel economy, the Nordman 7 takes the prize for tread life.

So overall, the final choice will rely on individual needs and the specific conditions that drivers more frequently encounter.

The Michelin X Ice Snow and Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V2, both being standout winter tires, excel in different sectors, redefining benchmarks in performance, fuel efficiency, and ride comfort, thereby offering an assortment of solutions to cater to diverse user inclinations and driving situations.

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 Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V2 (review) comes in 15 to 22 inches with following.

• Speed ratings: R, S and T.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 13 or 14/32″.
• Weight: 27 to 45 lbs.
• Tread warranty: None.

Tread Pattern

Starting with the Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V2, the tire introduces a uniquely different tread pattern.

The middle area of the tread features three ribs, distinguished from the shoulder lug by broad and noticeable circumferential grooves.

Each of these ribs hosts triangular-shaped blocks, with the central ones exhibiting slightly smoother edges in comparison to their surrounding counterparts.

However, they all sport aggressive wave-like siping, coupled with in-groove notches that intersect with thick rectilinear siping slits.

As we move towards the shoulders, the lugs adopt a blocky form, albeit with off-set edges.

Furthermore, these lugs are separated by wider lateral grooves.

Mirroring the central lugs, the shoulder lugs also incorporate a similar siping pattern.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow, on the other side, stands distinguished with its directional tread pattern.

This tread pattern consists of four circumferential channels, which originate from four central ribs, even though there are six ribs in total when you include the shoulder areas.

Located in the center is the narrowest and most intricate groove, created by two ribs. These ribs support blocks that are festooned with an array of sharp edges, snow vices, chamfered edges, and a blend of interlocking and straight-line siping.

The outer blocks, however, only display wave-like sipes and lack the plethora of biters found in the central blocks.

Finally, the shoulder lugs are the most aggressive part of the design.

They feature the thickest siping, coupled with sharp zigzag teeth on their lateral sides.

Tread Longevity

Tread longevity, heavily impacted by rolling resistance, is a performance dimension, where both tires show up with similar efficacy.

Here the Michelin X Ice Snow has the advantage of weight. It’s lighter structure basically exerts less pressure on its lugs, as the tire rolls, extending its lifespan.

Though its tread life is still similar to its counterpart, which has the advantage of having larger tread depth.

So this tire takes a long time coming down to 2/32″ of legal limit.

Winner: Both!

Ice Performance

In icy conditions, the Michelin X-Ice Snow clearly outshines its competitor. Utilizing advanced design features, such as unique biters scattered across the tread and enhanced with snow vices, the tire is able to deliver slightly better overall traction here.

It’s more innovative design, coupled with multi-angle siping and snow vices, allow for faster braking and handling efficacy on all types of snowy surfaces.

In comparison, the Blizzak DM-V2, despite also possessing multi-angle biters, falls short. Its biters are noticeably wider, which hinders their efficiency on compacted ice where narrower, aggressive siping is required.

Consequently, the DM-V2’s design is better suited for heavier vehicles like SUVs due to its broader tread voids.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow.

Wet Traction

Wet traction is largely influenced by two components: the tread design and the rubber compound. These two factors basically tell you about the tire’s ability to clear water away from the sipes and grooves.

Here, the grooves provide majority of water clearing, providing you with primarily, resistance to hydro or aquaplaning.

While sipes, provide you with wet grip, by clearing water off at a micro level. They basically work by sucking water particles in their slits.

Let me discuss these both dimensions in more details below.

Wet Grip

While both tires feature ample siping and flexible tread rubber, the Michelin X Ice claims an edge in terms of wet handling, while both are equal, you can say, when it comes to wet directional grip.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow’s edge in handling can be attributed to its superior water expulsion capabilities from its shoulders, due to the presence of multi-angle sipes and snow vices facing in both lateral and longitudinal directions on the tire’s tread.

These ensure a relatively more effective grip during cornering, avoiding overall slippage.

Conversely, the Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V2’s shoulder sipes are oriented only laterally, resulting in somewhat underwhelming handling performance during testing.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow.

Hydroplaning

Hydroplaning, the condition where water prevents the tread from making proper contact with the road, is a significant safety concern.

And the Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V2 outperforms in this area, with its wider grooves effectively dispersing water in all directions.

It’s competitor on the other side, lacking interconnected lugs, restricts water movement, especially laterally, due to its more closed up lugs, positioned longitudinally.

Winner: Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V2.

Snow Performance

When it comes to snow-covered terrains, the Blizzak DM-V2 outperforms nearly all the winter tires out there, including the Michlein X Ice.

This is because the tire features broader grooves, which enhances its ability to make greater snow-to-snow contact, (which is crucial for traction in fluffy snow conditions, as snow sticks better on snow, instead of rubber).

The multiple triangular lugs seen all over the tire’s tread, provide very snow clinging grooves, so you get a better snow holding abilities here, comparatively.

On the other side, the Michelin’s relatively closed pattern struggles to accumulate as much snow, thus hampering its traction.

Winner: Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V2.

Dry Traction

Dry traction, a vital performance measure of any tire, hinges on the extent of rubber in contact with the road surface. In this domain, two key factors come into play: directional grip and lateral traction.

Let me discuss them both separately.

Directional Grip

The efficiency of directional grip primarily depends on the tread’s central region. This is because, while cruising on straight highways, the majority of the tire’s load is concentrated in this area.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow excels here due to its interlocking central lugs, which maximize contact with the road, enabling shorter braking distances, comparatively.

On the other hand, the Blizzak DM V2 falls short in this regard due to its wider grooves and less streamlined structure, showing up with 5 feet longer braking distances.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow.

Handling

The quality of tire handling is significantly dictated by the tire’s shoulder design and overall weight. This is because when cornering, the weight load shifts towards the edges of the tread due to inertia.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow again emerges victorious in this aspect, owing to two primary factors. Firstly, its more compact shoulder blocks enhance rubber-to-road contact.

Secondly, the tire’s lighter structure, combined with a shallower tread depth, reduces lug movement (or block bending) during cornering, thus providing balanced understeering and oversteering capabilities.

In contrast, the DM V2, with its wider grooves and larger tread depth, experiences more lug movement during cornering, which diminishes steering feedback.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow.

Comfort Levels

The degree of comfort provided by a tire largely hinges on its noise generation and its capability to dampen vibrations. These characteristics are primarily governed by the tire’s construction. Let’s examine each of these elements.

Tread Noise

Tread noise is produced when air particles collide with the tread walls of the tire. In essence, larger tread voids tend to generate more noise.

When comparing the Michelin X-Ice Snow and its counterpart, the former emerges as the quieter option.

This can be attributed to its densely packed shoulder lugs, which serve as the primary entry point for air, as well as its crowded central lug design, offering less room for air particles to move about.

These design attributes not only reduce noise generation at the source but also work in conjunction with the tire’s superior pitch sequencing to further dampen any residual noise.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow.

On-Road Vibration

While the Blizzak DM-V2 may generate more noise, it excels in mitigating road vibrations, providing superior impact comfort.

This is due to its more absorbent tread rubber and greater tread depth, which provide a thicker buffer layer between the tire and any road irregularities.

Winner: Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V2.

Summing Up

Under snow-laden conditions, the Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V2 shines owing to its unique tread design and an ample number of tread voids, ensuring superior snow grip and clearance.

However, when traversing icy terrains, the Michelin X-Ice Snow stands out. It utilizes a plethora of intricate biting edges, angled slits, and multi-angled sipes to enhance its overall traction and handling capabilities.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow also demonstrates superior grip on both wet and dry surfaces, although the Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V2 takes the lead in terms of hydroplaning resistance.

After considering all these factors, the Michelin X-Ice Snow edges out slightly ahead due to its enhanced fuel economy, extended tread life, and quieter operation.

Both Michelin X Ice Snow and Continental WinterContact SI are top performers in the winter tire market, each excelling in distinct aspects of traction, lifespan, and comfort, presenting various options to match diverse driver needs and road circumstances.

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 Continental WinterContact SI comes in 15 to 20″ with following.

• Speed ratings: H and T.
• Load ratings: XL only.
• Tread depth: 10/32″ on all.
• Weight: 15 to 36 lbs.
• Tread warranty: None.

Tread Pattern

Starting with the Continental WinterContact SI, the tire presents a truly unique pattern.

Here, a directional design can be observed, with the central-most area consisting of an uninterrupted rib composed of misaligned blocks that mirror leaves on a vine.

These lugs feature chamfered edges and deep, interlocking sipes.

The surrounding lugs echo similar tread features, albeit with a larger size and siping patterns oriented at different angles to enhance overall traction.

Together, these lugs form three ribs, resulting in four longitudinal grooves.

These grooves are interconnected by slanted lateral tread voids, promoting excellent self-cleaning capabilities.

The shoulder lugs are elongated and have wider lateral gaps, which, in turn, yield a longer siping pattern, albeit with a similar wave-like design.

It’s worth noting that, in contrast to the central blocks, the sharper edges of the shoulder blocks are not chamfered.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow, on the other side, also comes with a distinct directional tread pattern.

Here, 5 circumferential grooves are formed by four ribs, in the middle, (not counting the shoulders).

The central most section has blocks very closed up together. So tread voids there are pretty crowded up, though they still are inter-connected with each other.

Here blocks have a mixture of dual siping, rectilinear and interlocking patterns.

Moreover, you also see sharp off-set edges here, along with snow vices.

Going outwards, you see less aggressive rib, with squared off blocks.

And on shoulders, you see blocks with thickest of all sipes.

These blocks have the widest of all lateral grooves, and their edges there are also serrated.

Dry Performance

The efficacy of dry grip relies on the extent of the rubber’s contact with the surface, underpinned by two primary factors: directional grip and lateral traction.

Let’s discuss them both one after another.

Directional Grip

The effectiveness of the directional grip depends on the central tread area, which basically tells you about the rubber-to-road contact.

And given that the middle area bears the brunt of the weight when a tire rolls straight, Michelin X-Ice Snow, with its more packed up interlocking lugs there, ensure a superior, and uninterrupted surface contact, delivering better performance.

Although the WinterContact SI features a near-continuous running layer, it lacks the streamlined execution of its counterpart, resulting in an almost 9 feet longer braking distance.

Winner: Michelin X Ice.

Handling

Handling rests on the tire’s shoulder areas and overall weight. As the directional travel applies pressure on the central lugs, cornering shifts the weight towards the shoulders due to inertia. The capacity of these lugs to engage with the road significantly affects performance.

Michelin X-Ice Snow, with its closed shoulder lugs, offers superior performance in this respect. Conversely, the Continental WinterContact SI, aside from featuring broader grooves, also carries a heavier structure.

This additional weight causes increased flex in the tire’s lugs, resulting in diminished steering feedback and an imbalance between understeering and oversteering.

Winner: Michelin X Ice.

Ice Traction

Michelin X-Ice Snow indisputably commands icy terrains, significantly outshining its counterpart, in all, braking, acceleration, and handling tests.

So why is this the case?

Well this is because simply put, the tire feature more biters.

The Continental tire, with its larger tread voids and less abundant notches simply can’t grip on slippery ice as better as the Michelin.

The tire lacks some intricate features like dual and multi angled siping, which are highly needed on this packed up snowy terrain.

In contrast, Michelin X-Ice Snow presents superior biters.

It offers a more diverse collection of groove notches and snow vices oriented in both lateral directions, coupled with an ample supply of dual-patterned siping, providing better overall gripping efficacy.

Winner: Michelin X Ice.

Comfort Levels

The sum of ride comfort hinges on two aspects: the noise emitted and the tire’s capacity to mitigate road shocks.

Firstly, let’s delve into the noise factor.

Simply put, noise generation is a product of air particles striking the tread’s walls. And so this tells us, that larger tread gaps result in a noisier ride.

Consequently, the Michelin X-Ice Snow, due to its tightly-packed tread gaps, provides a superior ride in terms of noise levels.

Enhanced by its sophisticated pitch sequencing technology, the tread blocks’ slight geometric variance results in air particles creating disparate tones that effectively cancel each other out.

On the other hand, the Continental WinterContact SI excels in vibration damping, thanks to its relatively softer tread compound. This feature grants it a superior shock absorption ability, ensuring a more smooth and comfortable ride.

Winner: Both!

Snow Traction

On fluffy snow, hands down we have a clear winner, the Continental WinterContact.

Basically, the Michelin X-Ice Snow, featuring a more closed design with a continuous running rib in the center and absent interlocking grooves, lacks the ability to gather snow, offering its rival an edge.

The significance of snow gathering stems from the principle that snow adheres better to snow than to rubber.

And the Continental tire, with its wider tread voids, permits improved snow-to-snow contact, enabling its lug voids to retain fluffy snow particles within their interconnected grooves and snow vices.

Additionally, its pronounced directional pattern facilitates paddling, scooping snow backwards, and generating superior forward momentum.

Winner: Continental WinterContact SI

Wet Traction

Two primary elements steer wet traction: the tread design and the rubber compound utilized in the tire’s construction. These variables essentially dictate the tire’s grip on damp surfaces and its resistance to hydroplaning.

Let’s discuss each.

Wet Grip

Although both tires feature substantial siping, the Michelin X-Ice Snow edges ahead slightly in performance. It incorporates a more aggressive siping pattern, merging linear and interlocking slits.

Moreover, the generous number of biters on its tread allows for more effective gripping on wet surfaces.

These attributes give the Michelin tire a slight advantage in terms of grip. Sipes operate by expelling air, subsequently forming a vacuum that draws in water particles.

In this area, the Continental WinterContact, with its less efficient siping, trails its competitor.

Winner: Michelin X Ice.

Hydroplaning resistance

Hydroplaning, essentially a form of floating, occurs when water forms a thin layer between the tire tread and the road surface due to ineffective water dispersion. Wider grooves help to prevent this.

That’s why the Continental WinterContact SI excels in this area.

Its broad grooves and sweeping arms allow for higher average speeds without hydroplaning in both straight-line and curve aquaplaning tests.

Its interconnected groove system efficiently disperses water in all directions, delivering superb hydroplaning resistance.

Winner: Continental WinterContact SI

Summing Up

What key takeaways can we glean from this discussion? Well, quite a few!

In snowy terrains, particularly with fluffy snow, the Continental WinterContact SI distinguishes itself through its unique tread design. However, this same design restrains the tire’s performance on icy and wet surfaces.

Also, its wider grooves, while beneficial for snow scooping, reduce the tire’s effectiveness in terms of dry traction, albeit the difference between the two tires is marginal.

In terms of comfort, both tires match evenly, given that comfort depends on noise generation and vibration absorption capabilities.

The Continental tire performs better in the latter, whereas the Michelin X-Ice Snow emerges as the superior choice for overall road noise reduction.

Michelin X Ice Snow and Continental VikingContact 7, both being leading names in the world of winter tires, showcase exceptional capabilities in different areas, setting the bar high in grip, durability, and ride quality, thus providing an array of choices to suit varying user preferences and driving conditions.

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 Continental VikingContact 7 (review), comes in 14 to 22 inches with following specs.

• Speed ratings: H and T.
• Load ratings: SL and XL (mostly).
• Tread depth: 10/32″ on all.
• Weight: 14 to 35 lbs.
• Tread warranty: None.

Tread Pattern

Starting with the Continental VikingContact 7, the tire displays a densely packed tread design, albeit maintaining its directional orientation.

To understand this tread, it’s useful to examine its two parts: the central area and the shoulders.

The central part of the tread showcases blocky, squared-off lugs. These blocks are adorned with numerous wave-like sipes and chamfered edges. As they rest on secondary rubber layers, serving as reinforced foundations, the gaps between these blocks function as in-groove notches.

As we shift towards the tread extremities, the shoulder blocks here take on an elongated shape and are paired up, linking to each other. Beyond forming sharper edges, these blocks feature a thicker, more pronounced siping pattern.

It’s also worth mentioning that these blocks are separated from each other by broad lateral voids, which significantly aid in the tread’s self-cleaning.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow, on the other side, also displays a unique, directional tread pattern

Here a total of 6 ribs are seen.

The middle most area of the tread has very good inter-connectivity of tread voids.

Here blocks are seen with thick siping slits, along with wave-like pattern.

They also have chamfered edges, off-set sides, and snow vices to them, allowing for epic snow traction.

The surrounding lugs becomes more squared off, and are not equipped with as many biters.

Though same is not the case for shoulder lugs, which carry much aggressive overall siping, and have zigzag serrated edges on their lateral sides.

Snow Performance

While both tires demonstrate considerable prowess under snowy conditions, the Continental VikingContact 7 distinguishes itself as the more proficient option on fluffy snow, and an analysis of its tread design provides the reason why.

This tire, characterized by a larger number of tread voids, mainly in the form of in-groove notches, the VikingContact adeptly traps snow particles, thereby improving snow-to-snow contact.

And as snow adheres better to itself than it does to rubber, this results in enhanced gripping efficiency.

Moreover, the sweeping lugs of the VikingContact excel in clearing away heavy snow, enabling forward momentum by casting the snow backward as the tire rolls. This unique attribute contributes to the tire’s slightly superior acceleration times.

On the flip side, the Michelin X-Ice Snow exhibits somewhat diminished efficiency in braking and handling. Its design is relatively enclosed, featuring a continuous central rib and narrower in-groove notches.

And while it does possess a directional tread pattern, it lacks the comprehensive swooping arms of its counterpart, limiting its effectiveness in paddling through snow.

Winner: Continental VikingContact 7

Ice Performance

The tables turn when it comes to icy conditions, with the Michelin X-Ice Snow offering 6 feet shorter braking distances and faster acceleration times compared to its counterpart.

This superior performance can be attributed to the numerous intricate biters spread across the tire’s tread. Its central area features slanted incisions of varying width, and when combined with snow vices, this ensures superior longitudinal ice traction.

Further enhancing its performance are its multi-angled sipes, offering extra gripping on almost all kinds of icy surfaces.

On the other hand, the Continental VikingContact 7, characterized by wider tread voids, doesn’t grip the ice as efficiently as the Michelin X-Ice Snow.

Moreover, it lacks notches and multi-angled siping on both the central and shoulder lugs, leading to longer average braking distances and handling times. However, subjectively, its steering feedback is almost on par with the Michelin X-Ice Snow.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

Wet Traction

Wet traction primarily hinges on two factors: tread design and rubber composition, which inform us about grip and hydroplaning resistance respectively.

Regarding grip, despite both tires boasting ample siping and soft tread rubbers, the Michelin X-Ice Snow edges ahead.

This advantage is due to the tire’s extensive collection of straight and interlocking sipes, offering superior water absorption capabilities and thus leading to enhanced wet grip.

The Continental VikingContact 7, on the other hand, only features laterally oriented sipes, and thus doesn’t provide as much overall traction, leading to longer wet braking distances and handling times on average.

However, in the area of hydroplaning resistance, the Continental VikingContact 7 shines.

With its wider grooves and sweeping arms, it offers higher float speeds in both curved and straight aqua tests.

Its interconnected network of grooves efficiently disperses water in all directions, offering better resistance to hydroplaning overall.

Winner: Both!

Dry Traction

The efficiency of dry grip largely depends on the tire’s contact with the ground, with directional grip and lateral traction playing pivotal roles.

In this aspect, the Michelin X-Ice Snow, with its continuous central rib, holds the upper hand. The tire’s design ensures superior and consistent surface contact as it moves in a straight line, particularly on highways. This, in turn, translates into shorter braking distances and quicker acceleration times in tests.

The continuous running rib of the Michelin X-Ice Snow, along with its surrounding closed-up lugs, contributes significantly to this aspect, although its lighter weight is a considerable factor in improving handling.

On the other hand, the heavier structure of the VikingContact 7 offers a limited performance. Its additional weight induces greater lug movement when the tire corners, reducing steering feedback and leading to longer handling times compared to its counterpart.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

Comfort Levels

Comfort in a tire is largely determined by factors such as road noise and vibration absorption. These aspects are heavily influenced by the tire’s construction, the materials used, the tread pattern, and the overall sidewall design, which primarily dictates cornering smoothness.

Focusing on road noise and vibration absorption, the Michelin X-Ice Snow exhibits superior performance in terms of quietness. This is largely due to the tire’s less voided tread, a crucial aspect since noise typically results from air particles colliding with the tread walls.

However, the Continental VikingContact 7, despite being noisier, compensates for this with better vibration absorption, providing a smoother ride over bumps and thus enhancing the overall comfort. Considering all these factors, both tires offer comparable comfort levels.

Winner: Both!

Fuel Economy

Fuel consumption in tires is closely linked to their road surface adhesion and overall structural weight. These are areas where the VikingContact 7 could use some improvement.

The tire’s significant weight increases its overall rolling resistance, while its wider tread voids lead to increased friction as the tire rolls over asphalt surfaces.

Contrarily, the Michelin X-Ice Snow, being lighter, exerts less pressure on the surface, thereby reducing overall friction.

Also, its tread features longitudinally aligned ribs that streamline the tire’s movement when rolling straight, minimizing obstacles and saving energy. This, in turn, improves fuel economy.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

Tread Life

The longevity of tire tread is significantly impacted by rolling resistance, particularly with these two tire models. In this aspect, the Michelin X-Ice Snow takes the lead.

Due to its lighter weight, the Michelin X-Ice Snow exerts less pressure on the tread blocks as they interact with the road. This reduces friction and slows down the rate of rubber degradation, thus prolonging the tire’s lifespan.

Conversely, the Continental VikingContact 7, with its heavier weight, concentrates more load on a smaller rubber surface because of its larger tread voids. As a result, each lug bears more weight, accelerating tread wear and reducing its overall lifespan.

It’s worth noting, however, that the performance gap between the two tires is relatively small, which is likely why neither model comes with any tread life warranties.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

To Conclude

When considering snow performance, the Continental VikingContact 7 shines with its unique tread design and higher number of tread voids, delivering superior snow gripping and clearing capabilities.

However, when it comes to icy conditions, the Michelin X-Ice Snow outperforms its counterpart, owing to its intricate biters, slanted incisions, and multi-angled sipes that provide enhanced traction and handling.

On dry asphalt, the Michelin X-Ice Snow leads in terms of grip, although the VikingContact 7 shows superior resistance to hydroplaning.

However, taking into account overall performance, the Michelin X-Ice Snow appears to be the more desirable choice. It offers slightly better fuel efficiency and tread life, along with quieter operation, providing a balanced blend of performance, comfort, and durability.