Menu

Test Charts / Tyre Reviews

Michelin CrossClimate 3 and 3 Sport VS Rivals

Compare each discipline in the tested size. See the measured result, position and gap to the best tyre, then read the verdict for the trade-offs behind the finishing order.

Tested size
225/40 R18
Tyres tested
4
Disciplines
16

Read the measurements, not just the rank

Lower is better for braking distances and lap times; higher is better for subjective scores and aquaplaning speed. Bars start at zero. Read the gap alongside the position: adjacent tyres can be separated by very different margins.

Positions and gaps always refer to the full test field within each group. Selecting tyres does not recalculate rankings or change the best-in-test benchmark.

Dry

4

Dry Braking

Dry braking in meters (100 - 5 km/h) [Average Temperature 11.5c]

Lower is better ↓
Dry Braking
Position / TyreResultGap to bestResidual speed
37.66 m Best 0 km/h
37.87 m +0.21 m 10 km/h
38.19 m +0.53 m 15 km/h
39.61 m +1.95 m 29 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 5.2% (1.95 m ≈ 0.4 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Michelin CrossClimate 3 would still be travelling at 29 km/h when the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Dry Handling

Dry handling time in seconds

Lower is better ↓
Dry Handling
Position / TyreResultGap to best
76.6 s Best
77.15 s +0.55 s
77.4 s +0.80 s
78.25 s +1.65 s

All the tyres in the Dry Handling test finished less than 3% apart.

Subj. Dry Handling

Subjective Dry Handling Score

Higher is better ↑
Subj. Dry Handling
Position / TyreResultGap to best
10 Points Best
9.75 Points -0.25 Points
9.5 Points -0.50 Points
9.5 Points -0.50 Points

The difference between best and worst was 5% (0.5 Points).

Subj. Fun

Subjective Fun Score

Higher is better ↑
Subj. Fun
Position / TyreResultGap to best
10 Points Best
9.75 Points -0.25 Points
9.75 Points -0.25 Points
9.5 Points -0.50 Points

The difference between best and worst was 5% (0.5 Points).

Wet

5

Wet Braking

Wet braking in meters (80 - 5 km/h) [Average Temperature 9c]

Lower is better ↓
Wet Braking
Position / TyreResultGap to bestResidual speed
31.28 m Best 0 km/h
31.38 m +0.10 m 7 km/h
31.47 m +0.19 m 10 km/h
34.43 m +3.15 m 39 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 10.1% (3.15 m ≈ 0.7 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Michelin CrossClimate 3 would still be travelling at 39 km/h when the Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Wet Handling

Wet handling time in seconds

Lower is better ↓
Wet Handling
Position / TyreResultGap to best
96.07 s Best
96.8 s +0.73 s
97.27 s +1.20 s
100.47 s +4.40 s

The difference between best and worst was 4.6% (4.4 s).

Subj. Wet Handling

Subjective Wet Handling Score

Higher is better ↑
Subj. Wet Handling
Position / TyreResultGap to best
10 Points Best
9.75 Points -0.25 Points
9.5 Points -0.50 Points
9.5 Points -0.50 Points

The difference between best and worst was 5% (0.5 Points).

Straight Aqua

Float Speed in Km/H

Higher is better ↑
Straight Aqua
Position / TyreResultGap to best
79.9 km/h Best
78.45 km/h -1.45 km/h
76.53 km/h -3.37 km/h
74.25 km/h -5.65 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 7.1% (5.65 Km/H).

Curved Aquaplaning

Remaining lateral acceleration

Higher is better ↑
Curved Aquaplaning
Position / TyreResultGap to best
2.33 m/sec2 Best
2.16 m/sec2 -0.17 m/sec2
2.15 m/sec2 -0.18 m/sec2
2.03 m/sec2 -0.30 m/sec2

The difference between best and worst was 12.9% (0.3 m/sec2).

Snow

4

Snow Braking

Snow braking in meters (30 - 10 km/h) [Average Temperature -9c]

Lower is better ↓
Snow Braking
Position / TyreResultGap to bestResidual speed
7.47 m Best 0 km/h
7.5 m +0.03 m 8 km/h
7.53 m +0.06 m 12 km/h
7.81 m +0.34 m 27 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 4.6% (0.34 m). From 130 km/h, the Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6 would still be travelling at 27 km/h when the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Snow Traction

Snow acceleration time (5 - 30 km/h) [Average Temperature -9c]

Lower is better ↓
Snow Traction
Position / TyreResultGap to best
4.42 s Best
4.43 s +0.01 s
4.54 s +0.12 s
4.78 s +0.36 s

The difference between best and worst was 8.1% (0.36 s).

Snow Handling

Snow handling time in seconds [Average Temperature -6.5c]

Lower is better ↓
Snow Handling
Position / TyreResultGap to best
76.44 s Best
77.45 s +1.01 s
78.22 s +1.78 s
79.54 s +3.10 s

The difference between best and worst was 4.1% (3.1 s).

Snow Circle

Snow Circle Time in Seconds

Lower is better ↓
Snow Circle
Position / TyreResultGap to best
20.81 S Best
21.68 S +0.87 S
22.16 S +1.35 S
23.98 S +3.17 S

The difference between best and worst was 15.2% (3.17 S).

Comfort

2

Subj. Comfort

Subjective Comfort Score

Higher is better ↑
Subj. Comfort
Position / TyreResultGap to best
10 Points Best
9.5 Points -0.50 Points
9.25 Points -0.75 Points
9 Points -1.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 10% (1 Points).

Subj. Noise

Subjective in car noise levels

Higher is better ↑
Subj. Noise
Position / TyreResultGap to best
10 Points Best
9.5 Points -0.50 Points
9.5 Points -0.50 Points
9.5 Points -0.50 Points

The difference between best and worst was 5% (0.5 Points).

Value

1

Rolling Resistance

Rolling resistance in kg t

Lower is better ↓
Rolling Resistance
Position / TyreResultGap to bestExtra fuel / year
7.6 kg/t Best £0
7.8 kg/t +0.20 kg/t £12
8.1 kg/t +0.50 kg/t £29
8.9 kg/t +1.30 kg/t £75

The difference between best and worst was 17.1% (1.3 kg / t). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6 uses about 52 L (£75) more fuel than the Michelin CrossClimate 3 Sport.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions. These calculators use the full test field, independently of your tyre selection above.

19,000 km
£1.45/L
Estimates based on typical driving conditions. Rolling resistance accounts for approximately 20% of IC vehicle fuel consumption and 25% of EV energy consumption. Actual savings vary based on driving style, vehicle weight, road conditions, and tyre age. For comparative purposes only. Lifetime savings based on a 40,000km / 25,000 mile tread life.

Test setup & methodology

The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.

Show full testing methodology

Recorded test conditions

Dry Braking
100 → 5 km/h · 11–12 °C
Wet Braking
80 → 5 km/h · 8–10 °C
Snow Braking
30 → 10 km/h · -10–-8 °C
Snow Traction
5 → 30 km/h · -10–-8 °C
Snow Handling
-10–-3 °C

Score Weighting

Weights express the scoring priorities, not how much each discipline actually changed the finishing order. The size of the performance gaps matters too. Category weights contribute to the overall score. Within each category, discipline weights divide that category’s share. Published finishing positions also need to be read alongside the editorial verdict.

TestWithin categoryShare of overall score
Dry · 25%
Dry Braking50%12.5%
Dry Handling35%8.75%
Subj. Dry Handling10%2.5%
Subj. Fun5%1.25%
Wet · 35%
Wet Braking45%15.75%
Wet Handling30%10.5%
Subj. Wet Handling10%3.5%
Straight Aqua10%3.5%
Curved Aquaplaning5%1.75%
Snow · 25%
Snow Braking30%7.5%
Snow Traction30%7.5%
Snow Handling30%7.5%
Snow Circle10%2.5%
Comfort · 10%
Subj. Comfort50%5%
Subj. Noise50%5%
Value · 5%
Rolling Resistance100%5%

Our standard methods

The conditions above are recorded for this test. The descriptions below explain our standard procedures; measurement windows and run counts can vary by test.

Dry Braking

For dry braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 110 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on clean, dry asphalt. I typically use an 100–5 km/h measurement window. My standard programme is five runs per tyre set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tyre category justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tyres are run repeatedly throughout the session to correct for changing conditions.

Dry Handling

For dry handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible so I can assess the tyre's natural balance, transient response, and limit behaviour without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, depending on the circuit, tyre type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tyres so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable. For more track-focused products, I also do endurance testing, which is a set number of laps at race pace to determine tire wear patterns and heat resistance over longer driving.

Subj. Dry Handling

I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated dry handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behaviour, mid-corner balance, corner-exit traction, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tyre before evaluating each candidate.

Subj. Fun

Some tyres deliver strong measured performance but still feel uninvolving, so I also include an assessment of driving enjoyment during spirited driving. This score considers steering feel, communication, balance, predictability at the limit, driver confidence, and the overall sense of connection between the vehicle and the road. It is intended to capture qualities that matter to enthusiastic drivers but are not always fully described by isolated objective metrics. Rated on a 1–10 scale.

Wet Braking

For wet braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 88 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on an asphalt surface with a controlled water film. I typically use an 80–5 km/h measurement window to isolate tyre performance from variability in the initial brake application. My standard programme is eight runs per tyre set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tyre category justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. To correct for changing conditions, I run reference tyres repeatedly throughout the session — in wet testing, typically every three candidate test sets.

Wet Handling

For wet handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit. I generally use specialist wet circuits with kerb-watering systems designed to maintain a consistent surface condition. ESC is disabled where possible so I can assess the tyre's natural balance, transient response, and limit behaviour without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, depending on the circuit, tyre type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tyres so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable.

Subj. Wet Handling

I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated wet handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behaviour, mid-corner balance, aquaplaning resistance, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tyre before evaluating each candidate.

Straight Aqua

To measure straight-line aquaplaning resistance, I drive one side of the vehicle through a water trough of controlled depth, typically around 7 mm, while the opposite side remains on dry pavement. I enter at a fixed speed and then accelerate progressively. I define aquaplaning onset as the point at which the wheel travelling through the water exceeds a specified slip threshold relative to the dry-side reference wheel. I usually perform four runs per tyre set and average the valid results.

Curved Aquaplaning

For curved aquaplaning, I use a circular track, typically around 100 metres in diameter, with a flooded arc of controlled water depth, usually about 7 mm. The vehicle is instrumented with GPS telemetry and a tri-axial accelerometer. I drive through the flooded section at progressively increasing speed, typically in 5 km/h increments, and record the minimum sustained lateral acceleration at each step. The test continues until lateral acceleration collapses, indicating complete aquaplaning. The result is expressed as remaining lateral acceleration in m/s² as speed rises.

Snow Braking

For snow braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 50 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a groomed, compacted snow surface, measuring 45-5 km/h. I generally use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tyre ever brakes on the same piece of snow twice. My standard programme is twelve runs per tyre set, although the sequence can extend further if the data justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. To correct for changing snow surface conditions, I run reference tyres repeatedly — typically every two candidate test sets.

Snow Traction

For snow traction, I accelerate the vehicle from rest on a groomed snow surface with traction control active and measure speed and time using GPS telemetry. I typically use a 5–35 km/h measurement window to reduce the influence of launch transients and powertrain irregularities. I use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tyre ever accelerates on the same piece of snow twice. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. I complete multiple runs per tyre set and average the valid results. Reference tyres are run typically every two candidate test sets to correct for changing snow surface conditions.

Snow Handling

For snow handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated snow handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible. The circuit is groomed and prepared after every run while tyres are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, excluding laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Because snow surfaces degrade more rapidly than asphalt, control runs are carried out more frequently — typically every two candidate test sets.

Snow Circle

For snow lateral grip testing, I use a circular snow track of fixed radius, broadly aligned with ISO 4138 principles. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. I progressively increase speed until the maximum sustainable cornering speed is reached. I normally record multiple laps in both clockwise and counterclockwise directions to reduce the influence of surface bias. Because snow surfaces degrade more rapidly, the control tyre is retested at regular intervals and I often use multiple sets of control tyres.

Subj. Comfort

To assess comfort, I drive on a wide range of road surfaces (often dedicated comfort tracks at test facilities) at speeds from 50 to 120 km/h, including smooth motorway, coarse surfaces, expansion joints, broken pavement, and sharp-edged obstacles. I evaluate primary ride quality, secondary ride quality, impact harshness, seat-transmitted vibration, and the tyre's ability to absorb sharp inputs. Ratings are assigned on a 1–10 scale relative to the reference tyre.

Subj. Noise

For subjective noise assessment, I drive at constant speeds across multiple surface types with the windows closed, ventilation off, and audio system off. I assess overall noise level, tonal quality, cavity boom, pattern noise, broadband roar, and sensitivity to both speed and road texture. Each tyre is rated on a 1–10 scale and supported by written observations on noise character and annoyance.

Rolling Resistance

Rolling resistance is measured under controlled laboratory conditions in accordance with ISO 28580 and UNECE Regulation 117 Annex 6. The tyre is mounted on a test wheel and loaded against a large-diameter steel drum. After thermal stabilisation at the prescribed test speed, rolling resistance force is measured at the spindle and corrected according to the relevant procedure. The result is expressed as rolling resistance coefficient, typically in kg/tonne.

More tyre tests

Cross-check this test

All tyre tests

Where these tyres were tested again, and how the verdict held up.

Rate your tyres

My tyres

Saved in this browser on this site. No account needed. Clearing browser data removes your choices.

Vehicle and size

Check the size, load and speed ratings on your vehicle. Saving a size does not confirm fitment.

Saved tyres

Save tyres from a tyre page, test or comparison to keep them here.

Select 2–8 saved tyres. Ranked comparisons require at least two shared tests.