Tests – · none yet Owners 73 · 44 reviews
Head-to-head
Updated
Continental ContiMaxContact MC5 vs Michelin Energy — Compared
Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews. Based on 0 + 0 road tests and 44 + 42 owner reviews. How we score
ContiMaxContact MC5 is ahead, 72–60
Add your size for an exact match
/R
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
72
Dry
ContiMaxContact MC5 +1755Why this score
Source ContiMaxContact MC5 Energy Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 71 (est.) ≈ 60 (est.) Reviews found online 75 48 ContiMaxContact MC5: 60% × 70.7 (est.) + 40% × 75.1 = 72
Energy: 60% × 60 (est.) + 40% × 48.4 = 55
No road tests of dry for ContiMaxContact MC5. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).
No road tests of dry for Energy. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).
-
73
Wet
ContiMaxContact MC5 +1261Why this score
Source ContiMaxContact MC5 Energy Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 72 (est.) ≈ 63 (est.) Reviews found online 74 57 ContiMaxContact MC5: 60% × 72.3 (est.) + 40% × 74.2 = 73
Energy: 60% × 62.9 (est.) + 40% × 57.4 = 61
No road tests of wet for ContiMaxContact MC5. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).
No road tests of wet for Energy. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).
-
72
Comfort
ContiMaxContact MC5 +765Why this score
Source ContiMaxContact MC5 Energy Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 70 (est.) ≈ 68 (est.) Reviews found online 75 60 ContiMaxContact MC5: 60% × 70.1 (est.) + 40% × 74.6 = 72
Energy: 60% × 67.6 (est.) + 40% × 60.2 = 65
No road tests of comfort for ContiMaxContact MC5 or Energy. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
67
Treadwear
Level67Why this score
Source ContiMaxContact MC5 Energy Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 66 (est.) ≈ 66 (est.) Reviews found online 68 67 ContiMaxContact MC5: 60% × 66.2 (est.) + 40% × 67.6 = 67
Energy: 60% × 66.1 (est.) + 40% × 67.3 = 67
No road tests of treadwear for ContiMaxContact MC5. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).
No road tests of treadwear for Energy. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).
-
73
Handling (owners)
ContiMaxContact MC5 +2251Why this score
Source ContiMaxContact MC5 Energy Reviews found online 73 51
Scores at a glance
| Category | Continental ContiMaxContact MC5 | Michelin Energy |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 72 | 60 |
| Dry | 72 | 55 |
| Wet | 73 | 61 |
| Comfort | 72 | 65 |
| Treadwear | 67 | 67 |
| Handling (owners) | 73 | 51 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip starts at “Important”. Treadwear starts at “Neutral” here: road tests measured it for at most one of the two tires, so it rests on owner reviews. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Recomputed
Headline score
72
/ 100
ContiMaxContact MC5
60
/ 100
Energy
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A ContiMaxContact MC5
Pros
- Exceptional cabin noise reduction and quiet operation
- High level of ride comfort and bump absorption
- Strong value-for-money proposition compared to premium performance rivals
Cons
- Tread wear can be rapid when subjected to aggressive or spirited driving
- Sidewalls are relatively soft, which may feel less progressive at the absolute limit
- Reports of increased puncture susceptibility once tread depth decreases
Tire B Energy
Pros
- Exceptional tread life and durability
- Noticeable improvements in fuel economy
- Low road noise and comfortable ride quality
Cons
- Lack of steering feedback and road feel
- Inconsistent or poor grip in wet conditions
- High price point relative to competitors
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Continental ContiMaxContact MC5 | B · Michelin Energy |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
Which one should you actually buy?
72
/ 100
Continental ContiMaxContact MC5
60
/ 100
Michelin Energy
Winner: Continental ContiMaxContact MC5 — better handling, dry and wet. It leads or ties in every category we score.
Pick tire A
You enjoy sharp, responsive handling
Continental ContiMaxContact MC5 scores 73 vs 51 on handling.
Pick tire A
You want the most grip on dry roads
Continental ContiMaxContact MC5 scores 72 vs 55 on dry.
Pick tire A
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Continental ContiMaxContact MC5 scores 73 vs 61 on wet.
Pick tire A
You want the most comfortable ride
Continental ContiMaxContact MC5 scores 72 vs 65 on comfort.
Tire A · Continental ContiMaxContact MC5
Tire B · Michelin Energy
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
ContiMaxContact MC5 or Energy?
Which is better in the wet, ContiMaxContact MC5 or Energy?
Continental ContiMaxContact MC5, 73 vs 61 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, ContiMaxContact MC5 or Energy?
Continental ContiMaxContact MC5, 72 vs 55 on our dry score.
Which is more comfortable, ContiMaxContact MC5 or Energy?
Continental ContiMaxContact MC5, 72 vs 65 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, ContiMaxContact MC5 or Energy?
Neither, by our numbers: 67 vs 67 on the treadwear score, within 3 points.
How do we compare tires?
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements), each result compared with every other tire in the same test and newer tests counting more. 40% comes from owner reviews found online, adjusted for how generously each site rates. Both use one scale: the average tested tire gets 70, the best 100. When a tire has only one of the two, the missing half is estimated from the other and the score stays closer to average; with no road test and fewer than five owner reviews it gets no score yet.
Handling is the exception: road tests measure it inside the dry and wet scores, so its own row comes from owner ratings only and starts as less important.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score. Full methodology