Tests 74 · 1 test Owners 64 · 11 reviews
Best test result: #1 of 6 in 2023 APAC Tyre Test (dry handling)
Head-to-head
Updated
Continental UltraContact UC7 vs Michelin Energy XM2+ — Compared
Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews (comfort 40/60). Based on 1 + 0 road tests and 11 + 7 owner reviews. How we score
Energy XM2+ is ahead, 75–68
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.
Tests – · none yet Owners 78 · 7 reviews
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
75
Dry
UltraContact UC7 +174Why this score
Source UltraContact UC7 Energy XM2+ Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / – tests 82 ≈ 72 (est.) Reviews found online 65 78 UltraContact UC7: 60% × 81.6 + 40% × 64.9 = 75
Energy XM2+: 60% × 72.1 (est.) + 40% × 78 = 74
No road tests of dry for Energy XM2+. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).
-
66
Wet
Energy XM2+ +1278Why this score
Source UltraContact UC7 Energy XM2+ Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / – tests 69 ≈ 77 (est.) Reviews found online 62 81 UltraContact UC7: 60% × 68.6 + 40% × 62.1 = 66
Energy XM2+: 60% × 76.5 (est.) + 40% × 81.2 = 78
No road tests of wet for Energy XM2+. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
-
63
Comfort
Energy XM2+ +1073Why this score
Source UltraContact UC7 Energy XM2+ Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / – tests 70 ≈ 70 (est.) Reviews found online 59 76 UltraContact UC7: 40% × 69.8 + 60% × 59.1 = 63
Energy XM2+: 40% × 70.2 (est.) + 60% × 75.7 = 73
No road tests of comfort for Energy XM2+. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
-
68
Noise
No comparison–Why this score
Source UltraContact UC7 Energy XM2+ Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / – tests 68 – Reviews found online ≈ 66 (est.) – UltraContact UC7: 60% × 68.3 + 40% × 66.3 (est.) = 68
No owner ratings of noise for UltraContact UC7. The owner half is the owners’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests, so the tests say nothing about how owners would rate it.
-
66
Treadwear
Energy XM2+ +672Why this score
Source UltraContact UC7 Energy XM2+ Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 66 (est.) ≈ 70 (est.) Reviews found online 66 76 UltraContact UC7: 60% × 66.5 (est.) + 40% × 66.4 = 66
Energy XM2+: 60% × 70 (est.) + 40% × 76.2 = 72
No road tests of treadwear for UltraContact UC7. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
No road tests of treadwear for Energy XM2+. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
-
63
Handling (owners)
Energy XM2+ +1780Why this score
Source UltraContact UC7 Energy XM2+ Reviews found online 63 80 -
71
Efficiency
No comparison–Why this score
Source UltraContact UC7 Energy XM2+ Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / – tests 71 –
Scores at a glance
| Category | Continental UltraContact UC7 | Michelin Energy XM2+ |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 68 | 75 |
| Dry | 75 | 74 |
| Wet | 66 | 78 |
| Comfort | 63 | 73 |
| Noise | 68 | – |
| Treadwear | 66 | 72 |
| Handling (owners) | 63 | 80 |
| Efficiency | 71 | – |
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
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Not important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.
Recomputed
Headline score
68
/ 100
UltraContact UC7
75
/ 100
Energy XM2+
Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A UltraContact UC7
Pros
- High comfort levels and smooth ride quality
- Quiet operation at city and moderate speeds
- Strong wear resistance and impressive mileage longevity
Cons
- Pronounced floatiness and wandering at speeds above 80 km/h
- Poor wet-weather performance with severe aquaplaning concerns
- Reduced steering communication due to sidewall flex
Tire B Energy XM2+
Pros
- Strong wet performance: reviewers cite very good wet grip, effective displacement of deep water and puddles at 60-70 km/h, and no aquaplaning.
- Good dry grip and braking, with high lateral grip that allows confident cornering at higher speeds.
- Quiet, comfortable ride, described as 'silent & comfort' in several reviews.
Cons
- A thinner sidewall ratio was described as slightly bumpy, though stability and handling remained very good.
- Wet grip was rated lower than dry grip in the one reviewer who scored each category (7/10 wet versus 8/10 dry).
- Complaints are scarce and minor. Only the sidewall bumpiness and the relatively lower wet score count as negatives.
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Continental UltraContact UC7 | B · Michelin Energy XM2+ |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer | Summer |
| Vehicle type | — | Passenger Car / Crossover |
Which one should you actually buy?
68
/ 100
Continental UltraContact UC7
75
/ 100
Michelin Energy XM2+
Winner: Michelin Energy XM2+ — better handling, wet and comfort. Where the Continental UltraContact UC7 is ahead, it is by less than 3 points. Continental UltraContact UC7 rests on little evidence so far (1 test, 11 reviews), so read this result as provisional. Michelin Energy XM2+ rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 7 reviews), so read this result as provisional.
Pick tire B
You enjoy sharp, responsive handling
Michelin Energy XM2+ scores 80 vs 63 on handling.
Pick tire B
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Michelin Energy XM2+ scores 78 vs 66 on wet.
Pick tire B
You want the most comfortable ride
Michelin Energy XM2+ scores 73 vs 63 on comfort.
Pick tire B
You want the longest tread life
Michelin Energy XM2+ scores 72 vs 66 on treadwear.
Tire A · Continental UltraContact UC7
Tire B · Michelin Energy XM2+
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
UltraContact UC7 or Energy XM2+?
Which is better in the wet, UltraContact UC7 or Energy XM2+?
Michelin Energy XM2+, 78 vs 66 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, UltraContact UC7 or Energy XM2+?
Neither, by our numbers: 75 vs 74 on the dry score, within 3 points.
Which is more comfortable, UltraContact UC7 or Energy XM2+?
Michelin Energy XM2+, 73 vs 63 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, UltraContact UC7 or Energy XM2+?
Michelin Energy XM2+, 72 vs 66 on our treadwear score.
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