Michelin CrossClimate 2 vs Nexen N Blue 4Season 2
Across the shared test set, Michelin consistently finishes higher (7 test wins overall vs. none for Nexen), driven by superior aquaplaning resistance, wet-road capability, and class-leading winter dynamics. Nexen counters with standout pricing, occasional braking flashes (including best-in-test ice braking once), and compelling mileage value in select tests-setting up a clear performance-versus-price debate.
Test Results
Independent comparison tyre tests are the best source of data to get tyre information from, and the good news is there have been seven tests which compare both tyres directly!
| Tyre | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Michelin CrossClimate 2 | seven |
While it might look like the Michelin CrossClimate 2 is better than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2 purely based on the higher number of test wins, tyres are very complicated objects which means where one tyre is better than the other can be more important in real world use.
Let's look at how the two tyres compare across multiple tyre test categories.
Key Strengths
- Best-in-class aquaplaning resistance (typically +9-32% over Nexen)
- Consistently stronger snow performance (traction/handling/braking)
- Shorter wet braking in most tests and more stable wet handling
- Lower rolling resistance and generally high projected mileage
- Excellent price-to-performance and strong value scores
- Top-tier ice braking in ADAC (only tyre with "very good" on ice in that test set)
- Comfortable ride and stable, predictable behavior at moderate pace
- Competitive dry/wet braking in isolated tests; outstanding mileage in one Auto Bild wear run
Dry Braking
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during six dry braking tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 stopped the vehicle in 3.4% less distance than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Dry Braking: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [s]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2 was better during one dry handling [s] tests. On average the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2 was 0.36% faster around a lap than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Dry Handling [s]: Nexen N Blue 4Season 2
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during two dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was 1.43% faster around a lap than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during five wet braking tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 stopped the vehicle in 4.47% less distance than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Wet Braking: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Concrete
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one wet braking - concrete tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 stopped the vehicle in 1.22% less distance than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Wet Braking - Concrete: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Wet Braking - Concrete winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [s]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one wet handling [s] tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was 0.88% faster around a wet lap than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Wet Handling [s]: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during three wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was 1.72% faster around a wet lap than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from four tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during three wet circle tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was 0.94% faster around a wet circle than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Wet Circle: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from five tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during five straight aqua tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 floated at a 8.8% higher speed than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Straight Aqua: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from four tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during four curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 slipped out at a 14.44% higher speed than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Snow Braking
Looking at data from five tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during four snow braking tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 stopped the vehicle in 3.36% less distance than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Snow Braking: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Braking winner was calculated >>
Snow Traction
Looking at data from five tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during five snow traction tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 had 7.96% better snow traction than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Snow Traction: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Traction winner was calculated >>
Snow Handling [s]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one snow handling [s] tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was 8.85% faster around a lap than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Snow Handling [s]: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Snow Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during three snow handling [km/h] tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was 4.38% faster around a lap than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Snow Handling [Km/H]: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Snow Circle
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one snow circle tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 provided 3% more lateral grip than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Snow Circle: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Circle winner was calculated >>
Snow Slalom
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during three snow slalom tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was 8.51% faster through a slalom than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Snow Slalom: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Snow Slalom winner was calculated >>
Ice Braking
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2 was better during one ice braking tests. On average the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2 stopped the vehicle 4.05% shorter than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Ice Braking: Nexen N Blue 4Season 2
See how the Ice Braking winner was calculated >>
Subj. Comfort
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one subj. comfort tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 scored 45.45% more points than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Subj. Comfort: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Subj. Comfort winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from five tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during three noise tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 measured 1.14% quieter than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Noise: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Tyre Weight
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one tyre weight tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 weighed 3.85% less than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Tyre Weight: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Tyre Weight winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2 was better during one wear tests. On average the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2 is predicted to cover 10.21% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Wear: Nexen N Blue 4Season 2
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Value
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2 was better during two value tests. On average the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2 proved to have a 39.76% better value based on price/1000km than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.
Best In Value: Nexen N Blue 4Season 2
See how the Value winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from four tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during four rolling resistance tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 had a 10.34% lower rolling resistance than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Fuel Consumption
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one fuel consumption tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 used 1.77% less fuel than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Fuel Consumption: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Fuel Consumption winner was calculated >>
Abrasion
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 was better during one abrasion tests. On average the Michelin CrossClimate 2 emitted 31.17% less particle wear matter than the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2.
Best In Abrasion: Michelin CrossClimate 2
See how the Abrasion winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Michelin CrossClimate 2 Driver Reviews
Drivers of the Michelin CrossClimate 2 largely report excellent all-weather confidence, with standout snow/ice traction, strong dry grip for an all-season, and comfortable, generally quiet cruising. Many note good tread life and stable performance over high mileages, with predictable handling and strong resistance to hydroplaning. A minority experienced inconsistent wet traction (especially on powerful RWD cars or as the tyre wears), more road noise on rough surfaces with age, and a small drop in fuel economy, and several mention the premium price. Overall sentiment is strongly positive for a do-it-all tyre.
Based on 140 reviews with an average rating of 81%
Nexen N Blue 4Season 2 Driver Reviews
Drivers of the Nexen N Blue 4Season 2 report a strong all-rounder with standout snow and ice traction, a very quiet and comfortable ride, and solid performance in typical dry and wet conditions. Many highlight excellent value and even improved fuel economy. A minority note that dry/wet grip can feel merely average at times and that traction in heavy standing water isn't class-leading, but overall satisfaction is high.
Based on 7 reviews with an average rating of 87%
Conclusion
Nexen's case rests on value and select strengths. It can match or beat Michelin in isolated braking runs (including ice braking and one dry/wet stop in the sports-car test), rides comfortably, and is meaningfully cheaper. However, its weaker aquaplaning reserves and less precise dry dynamics make its safety envelope narrower, particularly in heavy rain. If your priority is maximum all-weather safety and winter confidence, choose Michelin; if budget is tight and you mostly face mild conditions with occasional snow, Nexen offers solid competence for less.
Key Differences
- Overall rankings: Michelin routinely finishes near the top (e.g., 1/18, 2/13, 2/9), Nexen mid-to-lower (e.g., 12/18, 6/13, 9/9).
- Wet safety: Michelin consistently shorter wet stops (often 3-11% better) and stronger wet handling.
- Aquaplaning: Michelin leads decisively in straight and curved aquaplaning (+9-32% thresholds).
- Winter capability: Both are good, but Michelin is the snow specialist; Nexen shines on ice braking in one major test.
- Efficiency: Michelin typically has lower rolling resistance and competitive fuel use.
- Value proposition: Nexen costs less and sometimes shows excellent wear value; Michelin has higher purchase price but strong longevity.
Overall Winner: Michelin CrossClimate 2
Based on the tyre test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 has demonstrated better overall performance in this comparison. However, as you can see from the spider diagram above, each tyre has its own strengths which should be considered in your final tyre buying choice.Similar Comparisons
Looking for more tyre comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tyres:
Footnote
This page has been developed using tyre industry testing best practices. This means we are only comparing tests which have had both tyres in the same test.
Why is this important? Tyre testing is heavily affected by things like surface grip levels and surface temperature, which means you can only compare values from the same day. During a tyre test external condition changes are calculated into the overall results, but it is not possible to calculate this between tyre tests performed on different days or at different locations.
As a result you will see other tests on Tyre Reviews which feature both the %s and %s, but as they weren't conducted on the same day, the results are not comparable.
Lots of other websites do this sort of tyre comparison, Tyre Reviews doesn't.