Yokohama Geolandar CV 4S vs Michelin CrossClimate 2 — a true all-weather showdown between two tires that promise real four-season confidence without the seasonal swap. The CrossClimate 2 is the established benchmark for winter traction and wet safety, while the Geolandar CV 4S steps in as Yokohama’s all-weather challenger built to balance grip, stability, and everyday comfort. We’re going through wet, dry, snow, ice, comfort, and mileage to find out which one actually deserves the crown.
Table of Contents
Results
Results below were taken from the Tire Rack’s “What’s the Best Touring Tire for Premium CUVs? – 2024” test. A total of 8 tires were tested on Tire Rack’s own proving ground. The graph below shows the comparison between Yokohama Geolandar CV 4S vs Michelin CrossClimate2 based on the relevant performance category. The Yokohama Geolandar CV 4S was set as a reference hence at the 100% mark. Note that for subjective evaluation, we equate 1 point as 5%. Hence for example if tire A is graded 7 while tire B is graded 6, A is better than B by 5%.
As both tires are widely used in snow, Tire Rack has included snow & ice in its testing portfolio. A detailed testing on snow including acceleration, braking & handling were evaluated. The tire size of interest is a 235/55R19 which is a common tire size for Audi Q5. You can check out our latest tire size table for more information. The testing vehicle is a 2023 Alfa Romeo Stelvio Q4.
Wet
In wet braking, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 stops 3.4 feet shorter than the Yokohama Geolandar CV 4S, giving Michelin a 3% advantage. In wet handling (subjective), the Yokohama feels slightly more confident, scoring 0.07 points higher, which translates to a 0% edge. On the wet handling lap, Michelin is 0.06 seconds quicker, a difference so small it rounds to a 0% advantage.
Michelin holds the safety edge in outright wet braking and marginally faster lap times, while Yokohama counters with a slightly more reassuring wet handling feel. The gaps are small, but Michelin’s braking advantage gives it the clearer wet-weather safety lead overall.
CrossClimate 2:
- +3% in wet braking
- ~0% in wet handling (subj)
- ~0% in wet handling (lap time)
Dry
In dry braking, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 stops 5.9 feet shorter than the Yokohama Geolandar CV 4S, giving Michelin a clear 7% advantage. In dry handling (subjective), the Yokohama feels more composed and responsive, scoring 0.25 points higher, which equals a 1% advantage.
Michelin delivers stronger outright stopping power on dry roads, while Yokohama counters with better driver confidence and control. It’s braking precision versus handling feel, with each tire clearly playing to its strengths.
CrossClimate 2:
- +7% in dry braking
- -1% in dry handling (subj)
Noise, Comfort & Ride Quality
In noise, comfort, and ride quality, the Yokohama Geolandar CV 4S scores 0.25 points higher than the Michelin CrossClimate 2, translating to a 1% advantage in overall refinement.
CrossClimate 2:
- -1% in Noise, Comfort & Ride Quality
Snow
In snow braking, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 stops 6.6 feet shorter than the Yokohama Geolandar CV 4S, giving Michelin a 9% advantage. In snow acceleration, Yokohama needs 1.7 feet less distance to get moving, translating to a 7% edge. For snow handling (subjective), Michelin feels clearly more secure, scoring 0.75 points higher, a 4% advantage. On the snow handling lap, Michelin is 3.2 seconds quicker, which equals a 5% lead.
Yokohama shows slightly better traction when pulling away, but Michelin dominates where it matters most in snow — braking confidence and overall control. Taken as a whole, the CrossClimate 2 delivers the stronger and more confidence-inspiring snow performance.
CrossClimate 2:
- +9% in snow braking
- -7% in snow acceleration
- +4% in snow handling (subj)
- +6% in snow handling (lap time)
Ice
In ice braking, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 stops 11.6 feet shorter than the Yokohama Geolandar CV 4S, giving Michelin a massive 25% advantage.
CrossClimate 2:
- +25% in ice braking
Mileage
Both tires carry the same 60,000-mile mileage warranty, so on paper, long-term coverage is equal.
Looking at UTQG treadwear, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 is rated 640, while the Yokohama Geolandar CV 4S sits at 560. That’s an 80-point difference, giving Michelin a 14% higher treadwear rating, suggesting longer wear potential. For traction, Yokohama holds an AA rating, one step higher than Michelin’s B, while temperature resistance favors Michelin with an A rating versus Yokohama’s A as well, effectively equal.
| Brand | Tireline | Size | Tread Wear | Traction | Temperature |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yokohama | Geolandar CV 4S | All | 560 | A | A |
| Michelin | CrossClimate 2 | All | 640 | B | A |
Price
For the 235/55R19 size, the Yokohama Geolandar CV 4S is priced at $247, while the Michelin CrossClimate 2 comes in at $290. That means the CrossClimate 2 is $43 more expensive, or about 17% pricier than the Geolandar.
Tire size: 235/55R19
Geolandar CV 4S : $ 247
CrossClimate 2 :$ 290
Difference: +17% more expensive for CrossClimate 2.
Summary
From my expert view, both tires are excellent all-weather options with different strengths. The Michelin CrossClimate 2 leads in safety and winter performance, with shorter braking, much stronger snow and ice control, and higher treadwear for longer life. The Yokohama Geolandar CV 4S focuses on comfort and value, offering a quieter ride, better dry handling feel, and the same mileage warranty at a lower price. Simply put, choose Michelin for maximum all-weather confidence, and Yokohama for comfort-first value.
Dr Edwin Pang