tirewheelguide

Toyo NanoEnergy R38 looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.

Head-to-head Updated

Michelin CrossClimate+ vs Toyo NanoEnergy R38 — Compared

Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews. Based on 13 + 0 road tests and 119 + 8 owner reviews. How we score

CrossClimate+ is ahead, 80–70

Check price on Amazon · CrossClimate+ or NanoEnergy R38 on Amazon
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.

Michelin CrossClimate+
Tire AMichelin

CrossClimate+

All Season

Tests 80 · 13 tests Owners 75 · 119 reviews

Best test result: #1 of 15 in 2019 Summer and All Season Tyre Test (dry handling)

Toyo NanoEnergy R38
Tire BToyo

NanoEnergy R38

Summer

Provisional

Tests – · none yet Owners 70 · 8 reviews

Category by category

Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.

  1. 86

    Dry

    CrossClimate+ +15
    71
    Why this score
    SourceCrossClimate+NanoEnergy R38
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 13 / – tests93≈ 70 (est.)
    Reviews found online7672

    CrossClimate+: 60% × 93 + 40% × 76.3 = 86

    NanoEnergy R38: 60% × 69.5 (est.) + 40% × 72.2 = 71

    No road tests of dry for NanoEnergy R38. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).

  2. 80

    Wet

    CrossClimate+ +8
    72
    Why this score
    SourceCrossClimate+NanoEnergy R38
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 13 / – tests80≈ 72 (est.)
    Reviews found online7973

    CrossClimate+: 60% × 80.1 + 40% × 78.8 = 80

    NanoEnergy R38: 60% × 71.7 (est.) + 40% × 73.2 = 72

    No road tests of wet for NanoEnergy R38. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).

  3. 68

    Snow

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceCrossClimate+NanoEnergy R38
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 9 / – tests65–
    Reviews found online72–

    CrossClimate+: 60% × 65.5 + 40% × 71.5 = 68

  4. 73

    Comfort

    CrossClimate+ +4
    69
    Why this score
    SourceCrossClimate+NanoEnergy R38
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / – tests71≈ 69 (est.)
    Reviews found online7669

    CrossClimate+: 60% × 70.9 + 40% × 75.6 = 73

    NanoEnergy R38: 60% × 69.1 (est.) + 40% × 69.1 = 69

    No road tests of comfort for NanoEnergy R38. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.

  5. 70

    Noise

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceCrossClimate+NanoEnergy R38
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 9 / – tests68–
    Reviews found online73–

    CrossClimate+: 60% × 67.8 + 40% × 72.8 = 70

  6. 78

    Treadwear

    CrossClimate+ +13
    65
    Why this score
    SourceCrossClimate+NanoEnergy R38
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 3 / – tests80≈ 65 (est.)
    Reviews found online7565

    CrossClimate+: 60% × 80.2 + 40% × 74.5 = 78

    NanoEnergy R38: 60% × 65.3 (est.) + 40% × 64.6 = 65

    No road tests of treadwear for NanoEnergy R38. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).

  7. 73

    Handling (owners)

    CrossClimate+ +2
    71
    Why this score
    SourceCrossClimate+NanoEnergy R38
    Reviews found online7371
Scores at a glance
CategoryMichelin CrossClimate+Toyo NanoEnergy R38
Relative Score 80 70
Dry 86 71
Wet 80 72
Snow 68 –
Comfort 73 69
Noise 70 –
Treadwear 78 65
Handling (owners) 73 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
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

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
Recomputed
Headline score

CrossClimate+

NanoEnergy R38

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 CrossClimate+

Pros

  • Excellent traction and confidence in light to moderate snow and ice.
  • Strong wet and dry road handling that rivals dedicated summer tires.
  • Impressive tread longevity and durability over high mileage.

Cons

  • Performance in wet conditions can diminish significantly as the tire wears.
  • Increased road noise reported by some users compared to dedicated summer tires.
  • Occasional reports of a harsh or 'bouncy' ride on certain vehicle suspensions.
All owner themes in the CrossClimate+ review

Tire B NanoEnergy R38

Pros

  • Reliable wet and dry grip with predictable handling limits
  • Good value for money compared to premium brand alternatives
  • Solid longevity and mileage, with respectable tread wear reported

Cons

  • Slightly increased road noise reported by some users
  • Limited size or availability challenges noted by consumers wanting replacements
All owner themes in the NanoEnergy R38 review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Michelin CrossClimate+ B · Toyo NanoEnergy R38
CategoryAll SeasonSummer
Vehicle typePassenger Car / CrossoverPassenger Car / Crossover
Sizes available63—
Rim diameters13″ – 19″—

Which one should you actually buy?

Michelin CrossClimate+

Toyo NanoEnergy R38

Winner: Michelin CrossClimate+ — better dry, treadwear and wet. It leads or ties in every category we score. Toyo NanoEnergy R38 rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 8 reviews), so read this result as provisional.

Pick tire A You want the most grip on dry roads

Michelin CrossClimate+ scores 86 vs 71 on dry.

Pick tire A You want the longest tread life

Michelin CrossClimate+ scores 78 vs 65 on treadwear.

Pick tire A Your priority is wet-weather safety

Michelin CrossClimate+ scores 80 vs 72 on wet.

Pick tire A You want the most comfortable ride

Michelin CrossClimate+ scores 73 vs 69 on comfort.

Tire A · Michelin CrossClimate+
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · Toyo NanoEnergy R38
Check price on Amazon

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

CrossClimate+ or NanoEnergy R38?

Which is better in the wet, CrossClimate+ or NanoEnergy R38?

Michelin CrossClimate+, 80 vs 72 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, CrossClimate+ or NanoEnergy R38?

Michelin CrossClimate+, 86 vs 71 on our dry score.

Which is more comfortable, CrossClimate+ or NanoEnergy R38?

Michelin CrossClimate+, 73 vs 69 on our comfort score.

Which lasts longer, CrossClimate+ or NanoEnergy R38?

Michelin CrossClimate+, 78 vs 65 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