June 30, 2022
When discussing electric vehicles (EVs), the conversation inevitably seems to turn to range or range anxiety. Charging an EV requires more time than filling the tank of an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle, and at this time, charging stations aren’t as plentiful as gas stations. EV manufacturers know this, and they know it can be a barrier to entry for customers considering an EV purchase. To help alleviate those concerns as much as possible, the EV manufacturers want to maximize the range their vehicles provide, and tires are a key component in the strategy to reach that goal.
As a result, the original equipment (OE) tires on EVs tend to be highly focused on efficiency. That isn’t anything new, but there has always been the lingering question of "how much" more efficient the OE tires are than popular replacement market tires. Also, "how much" do the OE tires give up in terms of other performance attributes in that quest for maximum efficiency? Unfortunately, the specific answers to those questions will vary with each tire, but we wanted to start developing a picture that would help us provide some guidance for drivers.
We figured there was no better place to start than the benchmark, so we decided to test the OE tires on the Tesla Model 3 compared to a popular replacement market tire from the same manufacturer. We were eager to find out how the OE Michelin Primacy MXM4 T1 tires compared to the category-leading Michelin CrossClimate2, so we compared them head-to-head through our normal testing, plus the addition of some real-world range testing. Our evaluation used 2022 Tesla Model 3 Dual Motor Long Range test vehicles fitted with new, full tread depth 235/45R18 tires mounted on 18x8.0 wheels.
Our 6.0-mile loop of expressway, state highway and county roads provides a great variety of road conditions that include city and highway speeds, smooth and coarse concrete, as well as new and patched asphalt. This route allows our team to experience noise comfort, ride quality and everyday handling, just as you would during your drive to school or work.
The driver’s seat of an EV is a serene place to spend thousands of miles. Tires become one of the primary sources of ambient noise in the cabin without the constant ruckus of an internal combustion engine to mask other sounds. Because of this, there is almost as much focus on reducing noise generated by OE EV tires as there is on maximizing their efficiency. Often, EV-focused tires feature tread patterns tuned for low noise and a layer of sound-reducing foam on the inner liner designed to eliminate certain frequencies.
The OE Primacy MXM4 T1 tires delivered impressive ride and noise characteristics on the road. However, that didn’t come as a surprise considering it was tuned for the exact vehicle we were using for the evaluation. The ride quality was slightly firm, striking a nice balance between "sport" and "comfort." It didn’t filter out minor impacts like some touring tires we’ve tested, but it never felt upset, and the ride was fitting for a luxury vehicle. The CrossClimate2 was similar in ride quality, though it was even tauter still. It revealed more imperfections in the road and didn’t round over larger bumps quite as adeptly. The Primacy MXM4 T1 features Michelin’s Acoustic Technology, which is the company’s marketing name for tires with noise-canceling foam on the inner liner. Our drivers were pleased with the overall noise comfort of the tire over all surfaces, but they were particularly impressed with the relative lack of noise on smooth roads. On the coarse sections of the route, the tread’s interaction with the pavement created a subtle, low-volume tone that was mostly obscured by wind noise. Impact noise was very subdued, as well. We’ve found in previous testing that the CrossClimate2 is surprisingly quiet, given its aggressive-appearing, directional tread pattern, and we had the same results when testing with the Model 3. While it wasn’t as quiet as the OE tire, our drivers were impressed, nonetheless. Compared to the Primacy MXM4 T1, there was some additional, high-pitched cavity noise and some light growl on deceleration. Tread noise on the roughest surfaces on our route was also a little louder, but still not objectionable.
CrossClimate2 had the advantage. While the OE tire was no slouch in this regard, our testers noted the steering feel and responsiveness of the CrossClimate2 were a noticeable improvement. The response to inputs was quick and natural feeling. It eliminated the slight delay our team found with the OE tire, and the output was more directly proportional to the steering input. The Primacy MXM4 T1 felt heavier and was a touch lethargic in comparison. It required noticeable effort that felt somewhat disproportionate to the elicited response from the vehicle.
To evaluate the efficiency of each tire and its corresponding impact on vehicle range, our team drove both tires on a defined, 200-mile route on the highways near Tire Rack’s South Bend headquarters. We used two identical vehicles, driven in tandem, and efforts were taken to ensure identical conditions for each tire. Even so, our reported findings are the results of our specific test parameters, and your range may vary.
| Tire | Vehicle Reported Watts Hours/Mile | Estimated Range at 100% Charge | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Michelin Primacy MXM4 T1 | 236 | 305 miles | |
| Michelin CrossClimate2 | 263 | 271 miles | |
| *Vehicle Reported Watt Hours/Mile is the average reported by the vehicle’s trip display and was reset before each trip. | |||
| *Estimated Range at 100% Charge is determined by comparing the consumed range as reported by the vehicle to the consumed battery as reported by the vehicle to determine miles per 1% of battery charge. This number was multiplied by 100 to determine the theoretical range at 100% battery charge. | |||
Our 1/3-mile per lap test track course includes 90-degree street corners, a five-cone slalom and simulated expressway ramps. Run in both dry and wet conditions, the test track allows our team to experience the traction, responsiveness, handling and drivability normally only encountered during abrupt emergency avoidance maneuvers or competition events.
Wet and dry traction are common compromises in the pursuit of lower rolling resistance (and therefore improved efficiency), so we were very excited to see what kind of differences we would find in our track testing, and they were significant.
In the wet, both tires performed to a level that would be acceptable for consumers, but the CrossClimate2 exhibited an easily-noticeable advantage in traction. Starting with the pure objective figures, 50-0 mph braking distances were almost 23 feet shorter than the OE tire, which is over 1.5 car lengths. Laterally, the CrossClimate2 generated traction figures that were a tenth of a g more, which is a larger difference than we typically see between products in the same category. On the subjective side of the equation, the CrossClimate2 made the vehicle feel much more capable, with alert and responsive steering and strong front-end traction that allowed significantly more speed through turns. The advantage in braking was immediately noticeable, and the CrossClimate2 also provided the ability to perform two tasks at once, which was missing from the OE tire. The Primacy MXM4 T1 was perfectly acceptable in its own right, and it would have felt quite capable if it hadn’t been driven back-to-back with the CrossClimate2. The steering was a little slow and heavy, though it was relatively precise. The overall balance leaned purely toward understeer, with the front end running out of traction long before the rear could step out. Ultimately, though, its lap times were almost 2 seconds slower than the CrossClimate2, which is a monumental difference on our track.
Our dry track testing was limited to objective braking and lateral traction evaluation on our skid pad, and here the CrossClimate2 again displayed a significant advantage in traction, particularly laterally. The CrossClimate2 generated .9g on the skid pad, whereas the OE tire could only manage .85g. 50-0 mph braking distances for the CrossClimate2 averaged 86.1 feet, and the Primacy MXM4 T1 took a little over 7 feet longer to come to a stop at 93.4 feet on average.
Of the two tires in our test, the CrossClimate2 is the more traction-focused, and that extends to winter conditions, as well. It’s branded with the three-peak mountain snowflake (3PMSF), which indicates it meets the tire industry’s severe snow service requirements.
In our light snow testing, the CrossClimate2 was a dominant performer. In terms of objective longitudinal traction, it handily led 0-12 mph acceleration and 25-0 mph braking. It stood out the most, however, when driving with aggression around the handling track. Under throttle, the CrossClimate2 gave the car a solidly planted feel, whereas the OE tire in the same situation felt nervous and twitchy. The CrossClimate2 slowed the vehicle with significantly more authority and turned in quickly and confidently. The front-end traction allowed for useful rotation through turns, with balance and enough reserve traction to feel secure, despite the speeds and momentum of the vehicle in such slippery conditions. The Primacy MXM4 was a capable performer in its own right. It delivered acceleration and braking performances that are likely acceptable for the average driver. Similarly, our testers had mostly positive subjective impressions following our handling laps, though it couldn’t match the stronger competition of the replacement market tire.
On the ice, neither tire could match the braking traction of a dedicated winter tire, but the CrossClimate2 brought the vehicle to a stop with much more confidence than the Primacy MXM4. Objectively, however, there was only a 4.5-foot difference between the final numbers, with the Primacy MXM4 requiring 47.2 feet compared to the CrossClimate2 at 42.7 feet to brake from 12-0 mph.
Tire design always involves compromise. You have to give a little to get a little, and the two tires in our test are excellent illustrations of that point. Where do your priorities lie? The original equipment Michelin Primacy MXM4 T1 is an excellent match for our Tesla Model 3 test vehicle, delivering test-leading comfort and refinement on the road plus significantly more efficiency and range. The CrossClimate2 is no slouch on the road, with ride and noise characteristics that are just a touch off the standard set by the OE tire, plus steering that is much more engaging. Where the CrossClimate2 shines is its impressive traction characteristics, whether that means dry, wet, snow, or even on the ice. Which tire is the "winner" really depends on what is most important to you as a driver, but we can confidently say you won’t go wrong either way.
Need help choosing the right products for your vehicle? Our team of highly trained experts has the knowledge and passion to help. Just pick up the phone and give us a ring. Or let's chat via email. We love solving problems and lending a hand (or an ear).
Contact Us