General RT43 or Conti TrueContact Tour

[faramir9]

I cannot recommend the TrueContact Tour because of the ridiculous treadwear rate on the TrueContacts (original pre-"Tour" version) in 195/65R15 on my Corolla. Supposedly that is better on the newer Tour version---CR projected 95K miles, I think---but I just don't trust this tire line to last....which is a shame since it is a good-to-excellent tire in all other areas. Regular rotations and alignments, btw.

Just took off the TrueContacts and put winter tires on. Facing a quandary: After 31K miles, the TrueContacts have from 4/32" to 5.5/32" left. It's crazy for a "90K mile" tire. Not sure if I should put them back on in the spring, try to sell them or what.

Anyway, I have never run RT43s but there are zillions of reviews here and elsewhere, mostly good ones, and lousy treadwear is not mentioned often. The T-rated RT43 is supposed to be excellent in snow for an all-season. (So was the TrueContact the first winter.) Of the two you mention I would go with the Generals. If you have not purchased yet, maybe look at the Hankook H737, the new Yokohama Avid LX or the Pirelli P4. Good luck.

 

[supton]

I'd go RT43 but only because I've gone through several sets and am content with them--would rather not try to save a few dollars only to be disappointed. If it was big money, ok, but otherwise, for me I just don't think I could bear going different.

I have noticed their price has risen a bit over the years. Don't know how much of that is increased costs and inflation vs they built up a good following and now are reaping the rewards.

 

[Propflux01]

Originally Posted by supton
I'd go RT43 but only because I've gone through several sets and am content with them--would rather not try to save a few dollars only to be disappointed. If it was big money, ok, but otherwise, for me I just don't think I could bear going different.

I have noticed their price has risen a bit over the years. Don't know how much of that is increased costs and inflation vs they built up a good following and now are reaping the rewards.


its not really the cost, as both tires are not far apart on price at all.Its the noise I worry about most.

 

[CharBaby]

Originally Posted by Propflux01
Originally Posted by MONKEYMAN

I currently have H rated RT43s. First set was T rated which I liked better. I prefer softer ride.


How is the noise level? Handling?


I'll answer in the meantime from my reply above...

Originally Posted by Char Baby
I have had the General AltiMax RT 43 on another car(Lexus) and I liked everything about them except that they can be audible. Not loud persay, just noticeable. And the fact that I have become a fan of Generals in general(no pun). We have AltiMax Arctic as well and love'em.

 

[Tar_Rat29]

I have been running the RT43's on my 08 Acura TL for 4 years. The treadwear has been outstanding. Wet and dry very good and in light snow is also very good as well. I choose this tire because of the fact I drive a lot of miles for work and really wanted something that will handle all seasons and have good treadwear. There are better performance tires out there for wet and dry seasons, however for the price and what I am looking for in a tire these have performed very well. I would buy them again.

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted by knerml
Keep in mind that General Tire and Continental are the same company, and both tires are made in General Tire US plants..

That said, the Conti is a better performing tire with higher ratings, overall. Check Tire Rack for a side by side comparison.


Sort of yes, sort of no. My General RT43s actually say "made in Germany" ... Go figure.

I've had Conti's and RT43s. I now prefer the RT43s because they are a better all-around choice for my area (midwest includes snow, rain, dry, hills and curves). The Conti's do well in all but the winter stuff; the RT43s do better there.
If your area includes winter driving, get the RT43s. If not, get the Conti's as they will handle a tiny bit better.

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by Propflux01
Size is 205/55-16, going on my 2014 Elantra sedan. I have ran the RT43's on the GT, with 17" tires. But there is quite a bit of difference between ride comfort between the 16" and 17". Tire mileage is not much of a concern as the roads down here usually eat them pretty quick. Not much if any snow, hot assed summers, average cold winters, and rainy springtimes. Looking mainly for quiet and all around good handling. The choice is between these two.


I have CrossContact LX25's and have had RT43's. The LX25 is more refined and I prefer it. No experience with the TrueContact's. The RT43 isn't bad though, it's a killer tire for the cost.

 

[Propflux01]

I called the local tire guy and asked his advice as well. He exclaimed the conti was the "better tire" except in the snow, which I already knew. Then he stated the Cooper CS5 would be a better and quieter tire than the others. Tire rack seems to disagree.

 

[Passport1]

I second that. I've driven on Pirellis, Michelins and Continentals now Coopers. The CS5 Touring is the quietest and smoothest of all. Don't have any long term tread wear yet to report but they are made in the USA.

I'll buy another set for sure.

 

[Patrick0525]

Originally Posted by Tar_Rat29
I have been running the RT43's on my 08 Acura TL for 4 years. The treadwear has been outstanding. Wet and dry very good and in light snow is also very good as well. I choose this tire because of the fact I drive a lot of miles for work and really wanted something that will handle all seasons and have good treadwear. There are better performance tires out there for wet and dry seasons, however for the price and what I am looking for in a tire these have performed very well. I would buy them again.


@tar_rat29 How many miles on the rt43? Any idea on tread depth? So far I have 10k mi and my remaining depth is 10/32"

 

[edyvw]

Continental owns General Tire. There is no doubt one is getting better tire with Continental.

 

[UG_Passat]

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/chartDisplay.jsp?ttid=215

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=215

the Generals performed better on the track than the Continentals

While different BMW's were used, different tire sizes as well, 215/60r16 on the General test vs 225/50r17 on the Continental test. You would think that the sportier 17" tire size would get better results, but the cushier 16" tire size got better results comparing General to Continental.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by UG_Passat
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/chartDisplay.jsp?ttid=215

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=215

the Generals performed better on the track than the Continentals

While different BMW's were used, different tire sizes as well, 215/60r16 on the General test vs 225/50r17 on the Continental test. You would think that the sportier 17" tire size would get better results, but the cushier 16" tire size got better results comparing General to Continental.

I am not that concerned with small differences in tests as with performance after 20k.

 

[UG_Passat]

Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by UG_Passat
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/chartDisplay.jsp?ttid=215

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=215

the Generals performed better on the track than the Continentals

While different BMW's were used, different tire sizes as well, 215/60r16 on the General test vs 225/50r17 on the Continental test. You would think that the sportier 17" tire size would get better results, but the cushier 16" tire size got better results comparing General to Continental.

I am not that concerned with small differences in tests as with performance after 20k.

It is contrary to the notion that since Continental owns General, that Continental tires will always be superior to General.

Good luck finding test results that doesn't include shaving down tires, unless there is a standard test method to artificially environmentally age the tires also, in addition to shaving tires down.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by UG_Passat
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by UG_Passat
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/chartDisplay.jsp?ttid=215

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=215

the Generals performed better on the track than the Continentals

While different BMW's were used, different tire sizes as well, 215/60r16 on the General test vs 225/50r17 on the Continental test. You would think that the sportier 17" tire size would get better results, but the cushier 16" tire size got better results comparing General to Continental.

I am not that concerned with small differences in tests as with performance after 20k.

It is contrary to the notion that since Continental owns General, that Continental tires will always be superior to General.

Good luck finding test results that doesn't include shaving down tires, unless there is a standard test method to artificially environmentally age the tires also, in addition to shaving tires down.

OK, I get the point. Still have more confidence in Continental than General. I understand that Continental might offer better tire under General brand than CERTAIN tires under Continental brand. However, in the end, all tires Continental or General are developed by Continental. General is there just for marketing reasons.