Michelin Energy E3A looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.

Head-to-head Updated

Michelin Defender T+H vs Michelin Energy E3A — Compared

Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews. Based on 1 + 0 road tests and 1 + 10 owner reviews. How we score

Defender T+H is ahead, 73–65

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 Defender T+H
Tire AMichelin

Defender T+H

Premium Touring All Season tire

Provisional

Tests – · 1 test Owners 71 · 1 review

Best test result: #1 of 8 in 2022 Consumer Reports All-Season Tires (tested tread life (miles))

Michelin Energy E3A
Tire BMichelin

Energy E3A

All Season

Provisional

Tests – · none yet Owners 65 · 10 reviews

Category by category

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

  1. 72

    Dry

    Defender T+H +5
    67
    Why this score
    SourceDefender T+HEnergy E3A
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 70 (est.)≈ 67 (est.)
    Reviews found online7466

    Defender T+H: 60% × 70.3 (est.) + 40% × 74.1 = 72

    Energy E3A: 60% × 67 (est.) + 40% × 65.9 = 67

    No road tests of dry for Defender T+H. 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 E3A. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).

  2. 74

    Wet

    Defender T+H +12
    62
    Why this score
    SourceDefender T+HEnergy E3A
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 73 (est.)≈ 64 (est.)
    Reviews found online7559

    Defender T+H: 60% × 72.7 (est.) + 40% × 74.9 = 74

    Energy E3A: 60% × 63.5 (est.) + 40% × 58.6 = 62

    No road tests of wet for Defender T+H. 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 E3A. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).

  3. 66

    Snow

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceDefender T+HEnergy E3A
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 68 (est.)–
    Reviews found online63–

    Defender T+H: 60% × 67.7 (est.) + 40% × 63.3 = 66

    No road tests of snow for Defender T+H. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.33).

  4. 70

    Comfort

    Defender T+H +3
    67
    Why this score
    SourceDefender T+HEnergy E3A
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 69 (est.)≈ 68 (est.)
    Reviews found online7064

    Defender T+H: 60% × 69.3 (est.) + 40% × 70.1 = 70

    Energy E3A: 60% × 68.3 (est.) + 40% × 64.1 = 67

    No road tests of comfort for Defender T+H or Energy E3A. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.

  5. 69

    Noise

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceDefender T+HEnergy E3A
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 67 (est.)–
    Reviews found online71–

    Defender T+H: 60% × 67.3 (est.) + 40% × 70.5 = 69

    No road tests of noise for Defender T+H. The test half is the tested tires’ average (67): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.

  6. 73

    Treadwear

    Defender T+H +5
    68
    Why this score
    SourceDefender T+HEnergy E3A
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 1 / – tests75≈ 67 (est.)
    Reviews found online7069

    Defender T+H: 60% × 74.8 + 40% × 70 = 73

    Energy E3A: 60% × 66.8 (est.) + 40% × 69.3 = 68

    No road tests of treadwear for Energy E3A. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).

  7. 72

    Handling (owners)

    Defender T+H +8
    64
    Why this score
    SourceDefender T+HEnergy E3A
    Reviews found online7264
Scores at a glance
Michelin Defender T+H vs Michelin Energy E3A: scores by category (0–100)
CategoryMichelin Defender T+HMichelin Energy E3A
Relative Score 73 65
Dry 72 67
Wet 74 62
Snow 66 –
Comfort 70 67
Noise 69 –
Treadwear 73 68
Handling (owners) 72 64

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

Defender T+H

Energy E3A

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 Defender T+H

Not enough owner reviews yet to extract themes.

Tire B Energy E3A

Pros

  • Exceptional tread life and longevity
  • Low road noise and high comfort levels
  • Improved fuel economy

Cons

  • Audible squealing during cornering in warm weather
  • Performance degradation as the tire ages
  • Limited grip in heavy snow or icy conditions
All owner themes in the Energy E3A review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Michelin Defender T+H B · Michelin Energy E3A
CategoryPremium Touring All Season tireAll Season
Vehicle typeSUV and 4x4Passenger Car / Crossover

Which one should you actually buy?

Michelin Defender T+H

Michelin Energy E3A

Winner: Michelin Defender T+H — better wet, handling and dry. It leads or ties in every category we score. Michelin Defender T+H rests on little evidence so far (1 test, 1 review), so read this result as provisional. Michelin Energy E3A rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 10 reviews), so read this result as provisional.

Pick tire A Your priority is wet-weather safety

Michelin Defender T+H scores 74 vs 62 on wet.

Pick tire A You enjoy sharp, responsive handling

Michelin Defender T+H scores 72 vs 64 on handling.

Pick tire A You want the most grip on dry roads

Michelin Defender T+H scores 72 vs 67 on dry.

Pick tire A You want the longest tread life

Michelin Defender T+H scores 73 vs 68 on treadwear.

Tire A · Michelin Defender T+H
Tire B · Michelin Energy E3A

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

Defender T+H or Energy E3A?

Which is better in the wet, Defender T+H or Energy E3A?

Michelin Defender T+H, 74 vs 62 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, Defender T+H or Energy E3A?

Michelin Defender T+H, 72 vs 67 on our dry score.

Which is more comfortable, Defender T+H or Energy E3A?

Michelin Defender T+H, 70 vs 67 on our comfort score.

Which lasts longer, Defender T+H or Energy E3A?

Michelin Defender T+H, 73 vs 68 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