Dear authors,

I am satisfied with your response to reviewers' comments. Please go ahead and revise your manuscript as you have indicated. Please remember to acknowledge both reviewers in your acknowledgement section.

I would like to go through the entire manuscript again after you have performed your revision and uploaded your revised manuscript and therefore I have chosen the option that says "Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor)".

Thanks,
Vivek.

Dear authors,

Thank you for making corrections to your manuscript following reviewers' comments. I have now read through your entire manuscript again and will appreciate if you can please incorporate the following very minor suggestions.

1. Page 4, line 79. I feel that rather than "wrong reason", "different reason" is a better phrase. There is nothing "wrong" about improvement in RCMs results due to better model formulation.

2. Page 5, line 92. Please consider replacing ", thus" with "and therefore".

3. Page 7, lines 130-131. Please consider replacing "that the CORDEX variable list only defines three pressure levels" to "that the CORDEX requires atmospheric variables at three pressure levels"

4. Page 7, lines 136-138. Please consider replacing

This deficiency of the RCMs is related to the convective parameterization used and a specific convection scheme, as for example the Kain–Fritsch (KF), may outperform others, producing a more realistic diurnal cycle (Nikulin et al., 2012).

to

This deficiency of the RCMs is related to the convective parameterization used and some convection schemes, for example the Kain–Fritsch (KF), may outperform others, producing a more realistic diurnal cycle (Nikulin et al., 2012).

5. Page 9, line 188. Please consider replacing "We need to note" to "We note".

6. Page 10, lines 203-205. Please consider rewording the following sentence and provide a bit more info from

However, an unnecessary large full domain for higher resolution simulations is a caveat leading to larger RCM internal variability (IV) and a higher computational demand at finer resolutions.

to

However, an unnecessary large full domain for higher resolution simulations leads to larger RCM internal variability (IV) COMPARED TO .... and a higher computational demand at finer resolutions.

7. Page 10, line 211. Please consider replacing "although we should note that" with "although we note that".

8. Page 12, line 243. Please consider replacing "automatically scaled at very coarse resolution" with "automatically scaled to run at very coarse resolution".

9. Page 15, line 285. Please consider replacing "We also need to note that" with "We also note that".

10. Finally, please make the colour for ERAINT consistent across Figures 4, 5, and 6. Right now ERAINT is represented by colour black in Figure 4 and colour red in Figures 5 and 6. This is somewhat confusing.

Thanks,
Vivek.

Dear authors,

Thank you for making corrections.

Best regards,
Vivek.