Michelin CrossClimate SUV vs Hankook Kinergy 4S 2 X
In the 2 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Michelin CrossClimate SUV finished ahead 2 times and the Kinergy 4S 2 X not once. The CrossClimate SUV was stronger in dry and value, the Kinergy 4S 2 X in snow.
Performance profile
10 measurements from the 2 shared tests, each tyre shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
CrossClimate SUV
Kinergy 4S 2 X
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
In each test the better of the two figures counts as 100% and the other as its share of it, so a 36 m stop against 34.2 m is 95%; each spoke averages the shared tests that recorded it. 3 measurements recorded in only one shared test are left off; every measurement is in the table further down.
Where each scores higher
CrossClimate SUV
Kinergy 4S 2 X
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
Category scores are percentiles among tyres of the same season and class: 90 means this tyre out-performs 90% of them, measured across every test we hold, not only the ones it appeared in.
Where owners rate each higher
CrossClimate SUV
Kinergy 4S 2 X
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
Owners rate the CrossClimate SUV 79% from 23 reviews and the Kinergy 4S 2 X 79% from 6. Each spoke is one question owners answer out of 10; reviews are vetted by hand before publication.
Every measurement, side by side
Averages of the figures both tyres posted in the same tests. The gap is the average of each test's own gap, so figures from different cars and years are never mixed. Wins count the tests in which each tyre did better.
| Measurement | CrossClimate SUV | Gap | Kinergy 4S 2 X | Wins |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry CrossClimate SUV ahead | ||||
| Dry Braking m | 37.1 | 7.5% | 40.15 | 2-0 |
| Dry Handling km/h | 110.5 | 0.3% | 110.2 | 1-0 |
| Wet Level | ||||
| Wet Braking m | 47.25 | 1.7% | 48.05 | 2-0 |
| Wet Handling km/h | 76.55 | 0.5% | 76.95 | 0-2 |
| Wet Circle s | 16.15 | 0.8% | 16.02 | 0-1 |
| Straight Aqua km/h | 89.95 | 3% | 87.3 | 2-0 |
| Curved Aquaplaning m/sec2 | 3.49 | 4.6% | 3.65 | 0-1 |
| Snow Kinergy 4S 2 X ahead | ||||
| Snow Braking m | 26.15 | 6.5% | 24.45 | 0-2 |
| Snow Traction N | 2,967 | 2.6% | 3,029 | 1-1 |
| Snow Handling km/h | 54 | 1.1% | 53.4 | 2-0 |
| Snow Slalom m/sec2 | 4.09 | 1.5% | 4.15 | 0-1 |
| Comfort Level | ||||
| Noise dB | 71.35 | 0.2 dB | 71.55 | 1-1 |
| Value CrossClimate SUV ahead | ||||
| Rolling Resistance kg / t | 7.59 | 5.2% | 8 | 2-0 |
Braking distances and lap times are better when lower; speeds, wear and grip figures when higher. A test's figures are its own: sizes, cars, surfaces and temperatures differ from one to the next, which is why the averages here are only ever of tests the two tyres shared.
Head to head in 2 tests, 2019 to 2022
Each row is one published test in which both tyres ran on the same car, in the same size, on the same day. The line is the whole field, winner on the left.
| Test | CrossClimate SUV | Field | Kinergy 4S 2 X |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 Auto Bild SUV All Season Tyre Test | P1 of 11 | P2 of 11 | |
| 2019 Auto Bild 4x4 All Season Tyre Test | P1 of 10 | P3 of 10 |
CrossClimate SUV vs Kinergy 4S 2 X: your questions
Is the Michelin CrossClimate SUV or the Hankook Kinergy 4S 2 X the better tyre?
In the 2 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Michelin CrossClimate SUV finished ahead 2 times and the Kinergy 4S 2 X not once. On the Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the CrossClimate SUV scores 9.3 and the Kinergy 4S 2 X 9.2 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the CrossClimate SUV or the Kinergy 4S 2 X?
Across the shared tests the wet measurements are split 4-4 between the CrossClimate SUV and the Kinergy 4S 2 X.
Which is better in the dry?
The CrossClimate SUV led 3 of the 4 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 7.5% shorter in the dry across 2 tests.
Which is better in snow?
The Kinergy 4S 2 X led 4 of the 7 snow measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 6.5% shorter on snow across 2 tests.
Which lasts longer and costs less to run?
The CrossClimate SUV had 5.2% lower rolling resistance (2 tests). Owners rate wear 7.1/10 for the CrossClimate SUV and 8/10 for the Kinergy 4S 2 X.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 7.7/10 for the CrossClimate SUV and 7.5/10 for the Kinergy 4S 2 X.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the CrossClimate SUV 79% from 23 reviews and the Kinergy 4S 2 X 79% from 6. 68% of CrossClimate SUV owners would buy it again, against 83% for the Kinergy 4S 2 X.
Which is more expensive?
In the 2 tests that listed prices, the CrossClimate SUV was the dearer tyre in 2 of them, by 30.6% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The CrossClimate SUV is made in 33 sizes (16 to 20 inch) and the Kinergy 4S 2 X in 49 (16 to 22 inch). 25 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the CrossClimate SUV is graded B for wet grip and C for rolling resistance in most sizes; the Kinergy 4S 2 X B and C.
More comparisons with these tyres
Every Michelin vs Hankook test → All comparisons → Compare three or more tyres →
Run either of these?
Your review is the part of this page no test can supply: how the tyre wore, how it aged, what it was like in the rain in year three. It takes about five minutes.
Where this data comes from
Finishing positions and measurements are transcribed from each published test. A test only counts here when both tyres ran in it, so every figure was recorded on the same car, size and day as the one it is compared to.
About the TR Score
The Tyre Reviews Score rates each tyre out of 10 from every independent test result and vetted owner review we hold, so two tyres can be compared even before a test has run them together.
Who does the testing
Every test published as a Tyre Reviews test is run by Jonathan Benson, who has been testing tyres independently since 2007.