Dear authors,

Thank you very much for your responses. As you can see from the referee's reports, the manuscript needs (1) a better exposition of the methodological steps and (2) a better elaboration of the performance on different time scales (daily, monthly etc.).

I am looking forward to receiving the revised manuscript.

Best regards,
Stefan Brönnimann

Dear authors,

Thank you very much for submitting the revised version. You have taken into account most of the criticism and the paper is now better understandable. I appreciate in particular the new figures A1 and A2. The paper is a nice addition to the methodological discussions in downscaling and the use of analog methods. I can now accept the paper provided that you correct two minor technical issues:

1. non-homogeneities -> inhomogeneities (several instances)
2. Section 4.2 has three times in a row "Figure 11 shows... Figure 12 shows... Figure 13 shows..." Could you rephrase?
3. P. 20, l 15: "temperature for an extreme cold winter aver overestimated" -> meaning too high temperature, perhaps be more clear (and perhaps say by how much, approximately).
4. Please check again the label size on the figures in the proofs.

Best regards,
Stefan Brönnimann