Michelin CrossClimate 2 vs Kumho Solus 4S HA32+: The Michelin CrossClimate 2, launched in 2020, quickly became the benchmark in the all-season tire market, earning numerous accolades and test wins for its exceptional performance across various conditions. In 2022, the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ entered the scene with significant improvements, promising to challenge the reigning champion. This head-to-head battle in the all-season segment is set to be an exciting clash of innovation and engineering prowess, as Kumho aims to dethrone Michelin’s all-season supremacy.
Table of Contents
Results: Michelin CrossClimate 2 vs Kumho Solus 4S HA32+
Results below were taken from the 2024 ADAC All Season Test. There were 16 tires tested fully this time around which. The graph below shows the comparison between Michelin CrossClimate 2 vs Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ based on the relevant performance category. The Michelin CrossClimate 2 was set as a reference hence at the 100% mark.
ADAC did the full range of test including snow, ice & the expensive wear test. The tire size of interest is a 205/55R16 which is a common tire size for Toyota Corolla Altis. You can check out our latest tire size table for more information. The testing vehicle of choice is a Volkswagen Golf.
Wet
The wet performance of the Michelin CrossClimate 2 and the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ showcases some key differences. In wet braking, the CrossClimate 2 stops in 34.8 meters, slightly outperforming the Solus 4S HA32+, which stops in 35.1 meters. This 0.3-meter difference can be crucial in real-world driving conditions.
When it comes to straight-line aquaplaning resistance, the CrossClimate 2 can handle speeds up to 81 km/h before slipping, while the Solus 4S HA32+ starts slipping at 73.4 km/h. This indicates the CrossClimate 2’s superior ability to maintain traction in wet conditions, a vital requirement for all-season tires, especially when considering wet and snow performance.
Solus 4S HA32+ :
- -1% in wet braking
- -9% in aquaplaning
Snow
In snow performance, we were surprised to see the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ outperforming the Michelin CrossClimate 2, traditionally known for its strong snow capabilities. The Solus 4S HA32+ stops in 10.6 meters during snow braking, whereas the CrossClimate 2 takes 11.1 meters. This 0.5-meter advantage for the Kumho tire is unexpected. However, in snow traction, the CrossClimate 2 shows slightly better performance with 225.5 N compared to the Solus 4S HA32+’s 223.2 N. Despite Kumho’s edge in braking, Michelin maintains a marginal lead in traction.
Solus 4S HA32+ :
- +5% in snow braking
- -1% in snow traction
Ice
The ice performance of the Michelin CrossClimate 2 and the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ shows only slight marginal differences. The CrossClimate 2 takes 19.8 meters to stop during ice braking, while the Solus 4S HA32+ stops slightly quicker at 19.6 meters. This minimal 0.2-meter difference indicates that both tires offer very similar performance on icy surfaces.
Solus 4S HA32+ :
- +1% in ice braking
Wear
The mileage performance comparison between the Michelin CrossClimate 2 and the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ reveals some interesting insights. The Solus 4S HA32+ has a higher mileage, lasting 50,600 kilometers compared to the CrossClimate 2’s 44,000 kilometers. Despite this, the Kumho tire has a higher tread depth, as evidenced by its abrasion rate of 69 mg/km/t, which is higher than the CrossClimate 2’s 52 mg/km/t. This indicates that while Kumho offers more mileage, it also wears down faster per kilometer.
Solus 4S HA32+ :
- +15% in mileage
- -25% in abrasion
Dry
In dry performance, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 with a much lower tread depth outperforms the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ significantly. The CrossClimate 2 takes 39.5 meters to stop during dry braking, whereas the Solus 4S HA32+ requires 44.1 meters. This 4.6-meter difference highlights the superior dry braking capability of the CrossClimate 2.
Solus 4S HA32+ :
- -10% in dry braking
Noise
In terms of exterior noise performance, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 is slightly quieter than the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+. The CrossClimate 2 produces 71.1 dB, while the Solus 4S HA32+ generates 71.9 dB. This 0.8 dB difference indicates a marginally quieter ride with the CrossClimate 2.
Solus 4S HA32+ :
- -1% in exterior noise (+1 dB)
Fuel Consumption:
The fuel consumption performances of the Michelin CrossClimate 2 and the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ are almost identical. The CrossClimate 2 has a fuel consumption of 5.3 liters per 100 kilometers, while the Solus 4S HA32+ consumes 5.4 liters per 100 kilometers. This slight 0.1-liter difference indicates very similar fuel efficiency between the two tires.
Solus 4S HA32+ :
- -2% in fuel consumption
Price
In the 205/55R16 size, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 costs €102, while the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ is priced at €69. This makes the Solus 4S HA32+ approximately 48% cheaper than the CrossClimate 2.
Tire size: 205/55R16
Difference: -48% more cheaper for Solus 4S HA32+.
Conclusion
As a tire expert, my conclusion on the Michelin CrossClimate 2 and the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ reveals notable strengths in both options. The Michelin CrossClimate 2 excels with superior wet and dry braking performance, better aquaplaning resistance, and quieter ride quality. Its reputation for strong snow performances is challenged by the Kumho, but it still holds a marginal advantage in snow traction.
On the other hand, the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ has made impressive strides, offering remarkable value with a significantly lower price. It surprised us with better snow braking performance, competitive ice braking, and excellent mileage, even though it wears down faster per kilometer.
We were genuinely surprised at how much the Kumho Solus 4S HA32+ has closed the gap to Michelin’s renowned all-season tire. The competition in this segment has never been more exciting, with both tires offering compelling advantages for different needs and budgets.
Dr Edwin Pang