Remember, Internet "authorities" are always the most reliable source for unbiased information.

 

Agree, but I think even you would admit this test was apples vs. crabapples. It was unfair to throw Michelin's (avowedly low-performance) Standard Touring All-Season tire into a test of Grand Touring All-Seasons. The Michelin that belonged there was the Primacy rather than the lowly Defender, and it would have fared better. You'll also notice the Goodyear that WAS categorized correctly didn't win the test, either.

 

It doesn't bother me: you just need to understand that a test of a set of tires doesn't imply anything about the worthiness of tires not included in the test.
It's not a tire manufacturer review.

 

We just replaced the Michelin Energy Saver 235/45-18 on our 2020 ES 300h with Michelin Defender 2's.
While my first impulse was to step up to High or Extreme performance tires such as the Cross Climates or
Pilots or even Primacy models, a though review of Tire Rack and a realistic assessment of our actual (not
fantasized) driving habits lead back to the Defenders. 500 miles later I am very pleased, the initial impression
has been terrific. Quiet, MPG only went down to 47 from 48 and they don't look as radical as the CC's do on
a sedan. Waiting for rain and snow to evaluate the traction but it cannot be worse than the Energy Savers were!

 

Smart move to be realistic about your use case, IMHO. I got into an argument with someone on another forum recently when he told someone who was innocently asking for tire advice that they'd be safer and more comfortable if they put Michelin PS4's, all-out sports car tires, on their Kia Soul commuter box. And yes, I agree they can't be worse in traction than tires engineered to max out the EPA fuel economy cycle and little else (as my brother calls them, "Flintstone tires").

 

Look at this YouTube site that reviews all types of tires.