58
/ 100
Objective (60%)
–/100
No test data yet
User signal (40%)
40/100
1 owner review
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
Head-to-head
Updated May 2026
Continental ContiTour vs Michelin Energy Saver A/S — Compared (May 2026)
Our Relative Score blends 60% objective test data with 40% owner-review signal — so any two tires can be compared even if they were never tested on the same day.
VS
64
/ 100
Objective (60%)
–/100
No test data yet
User signal (40%)
59/100
9 owner reviews
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
VerdictWinner: Michelin Energy Saver A/S — better comfort, treadwear and dry. Pick the Continental ContiTour if wet matters most to you.
Read full
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made via links on this page.
Category breakdown
6 categories, side by side
Each bar is the Relative Score for that category. Expand a tile to see the test results and owner ratings behind it.
Dry
Score (0–100)
Energy Saver A/S leads by 5
Why this score
| Source | ContiTour | Energy Saver A/S |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | – | 82 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 70 | 74 |
Wet
Score (0–100)
ContiTour leads by 15
Why this score
| Source | ContiTour | Energy Saver A/S |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | – | 73 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 70 | 53 |
Snow
Score (0–100)
Why this score
| Source | ContiTour | Energy Saver A/S |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | – | 52 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | – | 50 |
Comfort
Score (0–100)
Energy Saver A/S leads by 30
Why this score
| Source | ContiTour | Energy Saver A/S |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | – | 81 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 40 | 69 |
Treadwear
Score (0–100)
Energy Saver A/S leads by 14
Why this score
| Source | ContiTour | Energy Saver A/S |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | – | 76 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 50 | 63 |
Handling
Score (0–100)
Why this score
| Source | ContiTour | Energy Saver A/S |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | – | 67 |
Scores at a glance
| Category | Continental ContiTour | Michelin Energy Saver A/S |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 58 | 64 |
| Dry | 70 | 75 |
| Wet | 70 | 55 |
| Snow | – | 50 |
| Comfort | 40 | 70 |
| Treadwear | 50 | 64 |
| Handling | – | 67 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Personalize
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip and treadwear start at “Important” — the two things buyers rank highest. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Recomputed
Headline score
58
/ 100
Tire A
64
/ 100
Tire B
Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.
From owners
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews across retailers and review sites — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
The Continental ContiTour receives a mixed to negative reception from users, primarily due to concerns regarding its longevity and noise levels. The feedback suggests that the tire fails to meet expectations for durability and cabin comfort over its service life.
Cons
- Poor tread life with reports of premature wear
- Excessive road noise and lack of acoustic comfort
Observations
- Users report significant degradation in performance and tread depth by the 25,000-kilometer mark.
The Michelin Energy Saver AS receives a mixed reception, primarily valued for its fuel efficiency and longevity in specific conditions, but frequently criticized for inconsistent tread life and poor performance in wet or cold weather. While some long-term users report exceptional durability, many modern drivers find the tire's grip and noise levels inadequate for daily commuting.
Pros
- High fuel economy and rolling efficiency
- Potential for high mileage in specific driving conditions
- Reliable dry weather traction for some users
Cons
- Significant hydroplaning tendencies in wet conditions
- Inconsistent tread life, with reports of premature wear
- Excessive road noise and audible squealing during cornering
- Unsettling braking performance in emergency situations
Observations
- Hybrid and EV owners, such as those with the Ford Fusion Hybrid and Nissan Leaf, report faster-than-expected tread wear.
- Users note that the tire's performance characteristics, particularly in cold and wet climates, are often perceived as inferior to dedicated winter or performance-oriented tires.
Specifications
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Continental ContiTour | B · Michelin Energy Saver A/S |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer Premium Touring tires | Premium Touring All Season tire |
| Vehicle type | Motorcycle | Passenger Car / Crossover |
Final verdict
Which one should you actually buy?
58
/ 100
Continental
64
/ 100
Michelin
Winner: Michelin Energy Saver A/S — better comfort, treadwear and dry. Pick the Continental ContiTour if wet matters most to you.
Pick tire B
You want the most comfortable ride
Michelin Energy Saver A/S scores 70 vs 40 on comfort.
Pick tire A
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Continental ContiTour scores 70 vs 55 on wet.
Pick tire B
You want the longest tread life
Michelin Energy Saver A/S scores 64 vs 50 on treadwear.
Pick tire B
You want the most grip on dry roads
Michelin Energy Saver A/S scores 75 vs 70 on dry.
Tire A · Continental ContiTour
Tire B · Michelin Energy Saver A/S
More comparisons
Also compared with
Continental ContiTour also compared with
Michelin Energy Saver A/S also compared with
How do we compare tires?
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements) normalized against the best tire in each test and weighted toward recent tests. 40% comes from thousands of owner reviews collected from retailers and review sites. When a tire has only one of the two, we use what exists and say so.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score.