APAC Touring Tire Guide: Detailed Cross-Section Analysis of Leading Brands

Touring Tire Cross Section Analysis: Welcome to our “APAC Touring Tire Guide: Detailed Cross-Section Analysis of Leading Brands.” Following the conclusion of our comprehensive 2023 Top Tire Review APAC Touring Tire Test, where the Michelin Primacy 4 ST emerged as the champion, we’re delving deeper to uncover the secrets behind these top-performing tires through a detailed cross-sectional analysis, specifically focusing on the tire size 225/45 R18.

While it’s widely recognized that tire compound plays a more significant role in performance enhancement, the construction of a tire, as revealed in its cross-section, holds its own set of secrets. These insights are often overlooked but are crucial in understanding what sets each tire apart. In this guide, we will explore these subtleties and provide you with an in-depth look at what lies beneath the surface of these leading touring tires. Join us as we uncover the hidden aspects that contribute to their performance, durability, and overall quality.

Body Ply:

When comparing the body ply configurations of various tires, it’s important to understand that more plies generally mean a more robust tire. However, this increased robustness can lead to higher rolling resistance and cost. Here’s a simple comparison of some popular tire models based on their body ply configurations:

1. Michelin Primacy 4 ST and Bridgestone Turanza T005A: Both of these models have a 2+0 ply configuration. This means they are more robust, offering better durability and stability. However, they might have higher rolling resistance and be more expensive compared to tires with fewer plies.
2. Continental UltraContact 7 and Nexen N Fera SU1: These tires feature a 1+0 ply configuration. They are less robust compared to the 2+0 ply tires but offer the advantage of lower rolling resistance and potentially lower cost.
3. Giti Control P10: With a ‘C’ ply configuration, this tire stands between the 2+0 and 1+0 ply tires in terms of robustness, rolling resistance, and cost.
4. Goodtrip GM-5: This model also has a 2+0 ply configuration, similar to the Michelin Primacy 4 ST and Bridgestone Turanza T005A, offering higher robustness at the expense of increased rolling resistance and cost.

Product	Body ply
Michelin Primacy 4 ST	2+0
Continental UltraContact 7	1+0
Bridgestone Turanza T005A	2+0
Giti Control P10	C
Nexen N Fera SU1	1+0
Goodtrip GM-5	2+0

In summary, the 2+0 ply tires (Michelin Primacy 4 ST, Bridgestone Turanza T005A, and Goodtrip GM-5) are more robust but come with the trade-offs of higher rolling resistance and cost. The 1+0 ply tires (Continental UltraContact 7 and Nexen N Fera SU1) offer a balance with lower rolling resistance and cost but less robustness. The Giti Control P10 with a ‘C’ ply configuration provides a middle ground.

Bead:

When comparing different bead configurations in tires, it’s important to note that the bead configuration generally doesn’t significantly impact the tire’s performance in terms of grip, handling, or fuel efficiency. Instead, the bead affects the tire’s bead unseating strength, which is the tire’s ability to stay securely seated on the rim. Here’s a straightforward comparison based on the bead configurations of various tire models:

1. Michelin Primacy 4 ST and Goodtrip GM-5: Both have a 5×5 bead configuration. This configuration offers higher bead unseating strength, meaning these tires are less likely to come off the rim under stress. However, this can result in higher costs.
2. Continental UltraContact 7: Features a 5×4 bead configuration. This configuration provides good bead unseating strength, slightly less than the 5×5 configuration, potentially at a slightly lower cost.
3. Bridgestone Turanza T005A and Nexen N Fera SU1: These models have a 3x4x4x4 (for Nexen N Fera SU1) and 3x4x4 (for Bridgestone Turanza T005A) bead configurations. These configurations offer moderate bead unseating strength and are likely more cost-effective compared to the 5×5 configuration.
4. Giti Control P10: Comes with a Hex-1x2x4 bead configuration. This unique configuration provides a balance between bead unseating strength and cost, though it might be less robust compared to the 5×5 configuration.

Product	Bead
Michelin Primacy 4 ST	5×5
Continental UltraContact 7	5×4
Bridgestone Turanza T005A	3x4x4
Giti Control P10	Hex-1x2x4
Nexen N Fera SU1	3x4x4x4
Goodtrip GM-5	5×5

In summary, tires with more complex bead configurations (like 5×5 in Michelin Primacy 4 ST and Goodtrip GM-5) tend to offer higher bead unseating strength but may be more expensive. On the other hand, simpler configurations (like 3x4x4 in Bridgestone Turanza T005A and Nexen N Fera SU1) may be more cost-effective but offer less bead unseating strength. The Giti Control P10’s Hex-1x2x4 configuration offers a unique balance between these factors.

Cap Ply:

When examining different cap ply configurations in tires, it’s crucial to understand their impact on the tire’s performance. The cap ply configuration plays a significant role in determining a tire’s capability at high speeds and can also indirectly influence wear patterns. Here’s a straightforward comparison of the cap ply configurations of various tire models:

1. Michelin Primacy 4 ST, Bridgestone Turanza T005A, Giti Control P10, and Nexen N Fera SU1: These tires feature a 212 cap ply configuration. This configuration is advantageous for high-speed capabilities, making these tires suitable for higher-speed driving. However, there is a risk of uneven wear if the 212 configuration is not properly executed.
2. Continental UltraContact 7 and Goodtrip GM-5: Both have a 222 cap ply configuration. While this configuration may be slightly less optimal for high-speed performance compared to 212, it offers more uniform wear over time. Additionally, tires with a 222 configuration tend to be more expensive than those with a 212 configuration.

Product	Capply
Michelin Primacy 4 ST	212 hybrid
Continental UltraContact 7	222
Bridgestone Turanza T005A	212
Giti Control P10	212
Nexen N Fera SU1	212
Goodtrip GM-5	222

In summary, tires with a 212 cap ply configuration (Michelin Primacy 4 ST, Bridgestone Turanza T005A, Giti Control P10, Nexen N Fera SU1) are better suited for high-speed use but require careful configuration to avoid uneven wear. On the other hand, the 222 cap ply configuration (Continental UltraContact 7, Goodtrip GM-5) provides more consistent wear at the cost of slightly reduced high-speed performance and higher manufacturing costs.

Under Tread Gauge (UTG):

When comparing different Under Tread Gauge (UTG) configurations in tires, it’s important to consider their impact on various aspects of tire performance. UTG refers to the thickness of the rubber under the tread pattern. Here’s a simple comparison of the UTG configurations of various tire models:

1. Michelin Primacy 4 ST: With a UTG of 3.2 mm, it offers better noise reduction, making for a quieter ride. However, this higher UTG can lead to slightly worse handling, increased rolling resistance, and higher cost.
2. Continental UltraContact 7: Features a UTG of 3 mm, similar to Michelin, providing good noise insulation but potentially affecting handling and rolling resistance.
3. Bridgestone Turanza T005A: Has a UTG of 2.5 mm. This is a balance between noise reduction and maintaining better handling and rolling resistance compared to higher UTG configurations.
4. Goodtrip GM-5: Comes with a UTG of 2 mm, offering a good compromise between noise reduction and performance attributes like handling and rolling resistance.
5. Giti Control P10 and Nexen N Fera SU1: These models have UTGs of 1.9 mm and 1.5 mm respectively, which are on the lower end. They offer potentially better handling and lower rolling resistance but might be noisier compared to tires with higher UTGs.

Product	Under Tread Gauge (UTG), mm
Michelin Primacy 4 ST	3.2
Continental UltraContact 7	3
Bridgestone Turanza T005A	2.5
Giti Control P10	1.9
Nexen N Fera SU1	1.5
Goodtrip GM-5	2

In summary, a higher UTG, as seen in the Michelin Primacy 4 ST and Continental UltraContact 7, tends to be better for noise reduction but can adversely affect handling, rolling resistance, and cost. Lower UTG tires like the Giti Control P10 and Nexen N Fera SU1 may offer improved handling and efficiency but could be noisier. It’s also important to note that maintaining strict UTG tolerances during manufacturing is challenging, and tighter tolerances can lead to increased scrap rates.

Tread depth:

Tread depth, mm	1	2	3	4	Average
Michelin Primacy 4 ST	6.48	7.16	7	6.64	6.82
Continental UltraContact UC7	7.41	7.53	7.3	7	7.31
Bridgestone Turanza T005A	6.63	7.4	7.48	7.37	7.22
Giti Control P10	6.35	6.74	6.71	6.14	6.49
Nexen N Fera SU1	7.01	7.29	7.85	7.38	7.38
Goodtrip GM-5	6.79	6.89	6.94	6.55	6.79

When comparing the tread depth of different tires, it’s essential to understand how it affects both performance and longevity. Tread depth is a classic example of a target conflict in tire design. Here’s a simple comparison of the average tread depths of various tire models and how they impact performance:

1. Michelin Primacy 4 ST: Average Tread Depth – 6.82 mm. This depth offers a balance between mileage and performance. It provides decent mileage due to the higher tread depth and adequate aquaplaning resistance, but it might have slightly higher rolling resistance and lower dry handling compared to tires with lower tread depths.
2. Continental UltraContact UC7: Average Tread Depth – 7.31 mm. This is one of the higher tread depths, leading to potentially higher mileage and better resistance to aquaplaning. However, it might compromise on rolling resistance and dry handling.
3. Bridgestone Turanza T005A: Average Tread Depth – 7.22 mm. Similar to the Continental, it offers good mileage and aquaplaning resistance but might not perform as well in terms of rolling resistance and dry handling.
4. Goodtrip GM-5: Average Tread Depth – 6.79 mm. This tread depth strikes a balance, offering reasonable mileage while maintaining decent rolling resistance and dry handling.
5. Giti Control P10: Average Tread Depth – 6.49 mm. With a slightly lower tread depth, it leans towards better rolling resistance and dry handling, but it might offer less mileage and aquaplaning resistance.
6. Nexen N Fera SU1: Average Tread Depth – 7.38 mm. This tire offers high mileage and excellent aquaplaning resistance due to its higher tread depth, but like others with similar depths, it may have higher rolling resistance and less optimal dry handling.

In summary, higher tread depths, as seen in Continental UltraContact UC7 and Nexen N Fera SU1, generally yield better mileage and aquaplaning resistance. However, they may fall short in rolling resistance and dry handling, which are critical for OEM tires. OEM tires typically have lower tread depths for better rolling resistance and handling, leading to lower mileage compared to their replacement counterparts. Tires like the Michelin Primacy 4 ST, Bridgestone Turanza T005A, and Goodtrip GM-5 offer a compromise between these factors.

Conclusion

In conclusion, each tire configuration offers its unique set of benefits and disadvantages:

1. Body Ply: More plies (2+0) like in Michelin Primacy 4 ST and Bridgestone Turanza T005A make the tire robust but increase rolling resistance and cost. Fewer plies (1+0) in tires like Continental UltraContact 7 and Nexen N Fera SU1 offer lower rolling resistance and cost but are less robust.
2. Bead Configuration: Complex configurations (5×5) in Michelin Primacy 4 ST and Goodtrip GM-5 provide better bead unseating strength but at a higher cost. Simpler configurations (3x4x4) found in Bridgestone Turanza T005A and Nexen N Fera SU1 offer a balance between cost and performance.
3. Cap Ply: A 212 configuration like in Michelin Primacy 4 ST and Nexen N Fera SU1 is great for high-speed stability but risks uneven wear if not manufactured precisely. The 222 configuration in Continental UltraContact 7 and Goodtrip GM-5 provides more even wear but at a higher cost.
4. Under Tread Gauge (UTG): Higher UTG (3.2 mm in Michelin Primacy 4 ST) reduces noise but can worsen handling and increase cost. Lower UTG (1.5 mm in Nexen N Fera SU1) improves handling but may increase noise.
5. Tread Depth: Higher tread depth (7.31 mm in Continental UltraContact UC7) ensures better mileage and aquaplaning resistance but can reduce dry handling and increase rolling resistance. Lower tread depth (6.49 mm in Giti Control P10) enhances rolling resistance and dry handling but may reduce mileage.

Each tire configuration has its own advantages and trade-offs. The choice depends on the specific needs and priorities of the driver, such as durability, cost, noise reduction, handling, and high-speed stability.

High-Resolution cross-section images for download