Michelin CrossClimate 2 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5: Can an all-season tire like the Michelin CrossClimate 2, with its 3-peak mountain certification, truly handle your winter? Or does the specialized Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5, a dedicated studless winter tire with a renewed edge, dominate in severe snow and ice? This battle pits all-season versatility against winter-focused expertise. Let’s dive into the trade-offs—does the Michelin CrossClimate 2 hold up, or is the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5’s specialist design unbeatable in harsh conditions?
Table of Contents
Results: Michelin Cross Climate 2 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
Results below were taken from 2024 Vi Bilagare Friction Tire Test with a total of 7 tires tested. The graph below shows the comparison between Michelin Cross Climate 2 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 based on the relevant performance category. The Michelin CrossClimate 2 being the older tire was set as a reference hence at the 100% mark.
Note that for subjective ratings, 1 point is equivalent to 10%. So if tire A has a 4 point rating & tire B has a 3 point rating, tire A is better than tire B by 10%. The tire size of interest is a 225/45 R17 which is a common tire size for Audi S3 and BMW 1 series. The testing vehicle is a Volkswagen Golf.
Ice
On ice, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 clearly outperforms the Michelin CrossClimate 2, highlighting its specialist advantage as a studless winter tire. In ice braking from 25-5 km/h, the R5 stops 7.02 meters shorter than the CrossClimate 2, a significant safety margin. The R5 also accelerates faster on ice, taking only 8.01 seconds compared to the CrossClimate’s 13 seconds. In ice handling, the R5 completes a lap 2.8 seconds quicker, further proving its edge. Ice remains a stronghold for studless winter tires like the R5, as shown by these results, where winter-ready traction is essential.
Hakkapeliitta R5 :
- +62% in ice braking
- +54% in ice traction
- +4% in ice handling (lap time)
Snow
On snow, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 still has the advantage, though the differences are smaller. In snow braking from 35-5 km/h, the R5 stops 0.82 meters shorter than the Michelin CrossClimate 2. For snow acceleration from 5-35 km/h, the R5 is slightly faster, taking 4.2 seconds compared to the CrossClimate’s 4.46 seconds. In snow handling, the R5 completes a lap 5 seconds quicker than the CrossClimate. While the CrossClimate 2, as a 3-peak mountain certified all-season tire, is legally bound to handle snowy conditions at a certain level, the snow advantage remains with the studless winter tire.
Hakkapeliitta R5 :
- +7% in snow braking
- +6% in snow traction
- +6% in snow handling (lap time)
Wet
In wet conditions, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 takes a decisive lead, showing the opposite trend compared to ice and snow. For wet braking from 80-5 km/h, the CrossClimate stops a substantial 14.43 meters shorter than the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5. In wet handling, the CrossClimate completes a lap 3.3 seconds faster, demonstrating better grip and control. When it comes to aquaplaning resistance, the CrossClimate maintains stability at 86 km/h, significantly outperforming the R5, which loses traction at just 59.8 km/h. In wet conditions, the all-season CrossClimate 2’s design shines through.
Hakkapeliitta R5 :
- -34% in wet braking
- -8% in wet handling (average lap speed)
- -30% in straight aquaplaning
Dry
In dry conditions, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 outperforms the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5. For dry braking, the CrossClimate stops 5.5 meters shorter than the R5, providing a substantial safety margin. In terms of subjective dry handling, the CrossClimate scores higher with a rating of 5, compared to the R5’s score of 3, indicating better control and responsiveness. The CrossClimate 2 is clearly more adept on dry roads than the winter-focused R5.
Hakkapeliitta R5 :
- -18% in dry braking
- -20% in dry handling (subjective)
Noise
In terms of noise, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 has a slight edge over the Michelin CrossClimate 2. With a noise level of 68.1 decibels, the R5 is marginally quieter than the CrossClimate’s 68.8 decibels. Subjectively, the R5 also scores higher, rated at 3 compared to the CrossClimate’s 1, reflecting better comfort. The clear advantage of the studless R5 lies in its softer compound, which absorbs bumps more effectively than the harder all-season CrossClimate, enhancing overall noise dampening.
Hakkapeliitta R5 :
- +20% in subjective noise
- +1% in exterior noise (-0.7 dB)
Fuel Consumption
In fuel consumption, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 holds a slight advantage over the Michelin CrossClimate 2. The R5 uses 5.3 liters per 100 km, just a bit more efficient than the CrossClimate’s 5.45 liters per 100 km. This small difference shows that both tires are relatively close in fuel efficiency, with the R5 having a minor edge.
Hakkapeliitta R5 :
- +3% in fuel consumption
Price
For the 225/40 R18 size, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 is significantly pricier at €298, while the Michelin CrossClimate 2 costs €134. This makes the Hakkapeliitta R5 55% more expensive, highlighting the premium for its specialized winter performance.
Tire size: 225/40 R18
- CrossClimate 2 : € 134
- Hakkapeliitta R5 : € 298
Difference: +55% more expensive for Hakkapeliitta R5
Conclusion
Both the Michelin CrossClimate 2 and Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 excel in their own areas. The CrossClimate 2 is versatile and affordable, ideal for moderate winters with strong wet and dry performance. The Hakkapeliitta R5, though pricier, offers superior grip on ice and snow, perfect for extreme winter conditions. Choose based on your winter needs and budget—each tire serves its purpose well.
Dr Edwin Pang