Both contenders are specially formulated for exotic sports cars to deliver high-speed performance in hot summer environments. Both of them have asymmetrical tread patterns for improved traction in dry and wet conditions.
Designed through a Multi-compound Technology, Sport Cup 2 is formulated for precision handling, quiet journey, and high performance. As a track day tire, it delivers consistent lap time and enhanced track endurance compared to other tires in the industry.
Sport Cup 2 Connect is an advanced version of its competitor which is embedded with Track Connected Technology. This technology allows the users to keep track of their tire’s performance, tread depth, temperature & pressure before and after each session, and much more.
Compared to its Cup 2, Cup 2 Connect has superior wet traction, tread pattern, durability, and speed rating. But it falls behind its competitor when it comes to dry road handling and noise & comfort.
Table of Contents
Side By Side Comparison
| Specs | Sport Cup 2 | Sport Cup 2 Connect |
| Tire Type | Performance Tire | Performance Tire |
| Tread Type | Asymmetrical | Asymmetrical |
| Tire Season | Summer Season | Summer Season |
| Available Sizes, Inches | 18, 19, 20, 21 | 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 |
| Vehicle | Exotic Sports Car | Exotic Sports Car |
| Standard Limited Warranty | 6 Years | 6 Years |
| UTQG Rating | 180 AA A | 180 AA B |
| Cost (245/35R19) | 457.74 $ | 418.02 $ |
Tread Composition
Both of them are manufactured through Bi-compound Technology in which two rubber types are mixed for dual properties. A High Molecular Chain Elastomer optimizes their grip on wet and dry surfaces while a Rigid Elastomer optimizes their steering and maneuvering capability.
So in this regard, both competitors are on the same ground.
Tread Design
The tread design of both competitors is almost similar to one another. They have an asymmetrical tread pattern comprised of three circumferential grooves and two central ribs with the external one being carved with a single halfway notch while the internal rib is carved with two halfway notches. Their inner shoulder is comparatively smaller in size than the outer one. Both shoulders have wide lateral grooves. Both competitors have horizontal straight line-shaped siping over their entire surface at a constant distance.
The only major difference between their tread designs is that the tread depth of Connect is slightly higher than its competitor. And the length of the lateral grooves of Connect’s outer shoulder is also longer than its competitor. Considering both of these facts, we can state that the tread design of Connect is superior to its competitor.
Road Grip
Both of the contenders have identical tread patterns in central ribs, equivalent width of circumferential grooves, and equal size of notches in the ribs. All of this suggests that they have an equal void ratio and contact patch, which is the reason for their equivalent grip on dry roads.
Even though both of them have similar siping densities and the width of circumferential groves & notches is also equivalent, their hydroplaning resistivity would not be the same. It’s because the Connect would have more volume in its circumferential grooves and notches due to having relatively more tread depth. This would mean that its grooves and notches would capture and release a relatively more amount of water, and hence higher hydroplaning resistivity. This indicates that Connect would have a superior grip on wet roads compared to its competitor.
Both of them have an equal grip on dry roads but Connect takes the lead in wet conditions.
Road Handling
Connect’s shoulders have different lengths and depths of its lateral grooves from its competitor’s shoulders. This affects a lot on the handling capability of both contenders on dry or wet surfaces. On a dry road, Cup would have better steering or maneuvering ability due to a high contact patch since its lateral grooves are comparatively smaller which indicated a low void ratio. On the other hand, Connect would have superior handling on wet roads due to enhanced hydroplaning resistivity because of its long and deep lateral grooves.
Connect would have better handling in wet conditions while Cup would be best suited for dry roads from a handling perspective.
Durability and Treadwear
Both of the competitors have identical tread ratings which indicate that they would deplete at equal rates. But Connect would last a little bit more since its tread depth is comparatively more than its competitor. Since the change is minute and Connect is slightly more durable, we can say that both competitors are pretty good tires when it comes to durability.
| Contenders | Tread Depth |
| Sport Cup 2 (245/35R19) | 7/32” |
| Sport Cup 2 Connect (245/35R19) | 7.2/32” |
Comfort & Noise
Since the tread depth of Connect is comparatively more than its competitor, it would produce more noise and would be less comfortable. It is because of its larger groove volume, that more amount of air would get trapped in it at high-speed conditions. The trapped air would collide with grooves’ walls and produce noise and makes the ride uncomfortable.
Hence Cup would be a better choice for a quiet and comfortable ride.
Load & Speed
The speed and load ratings along with their respective values are mentioned in the tables given below.
In terms of speed:
| Value | Rating | |
| Sport Cup 2 (245/35R19) | Y | 186mph |
| Sport Cup 2 Connect (245/35R19) | (Y) | 186+ mph |
In terms of load:
| Value | Rating | |
| Sport Cup 2 (245/35R19) | 93 | 1433 |
| Sport Cup 2 Connect (245/35R19) | 93 | 1433 |
Both of the competitors are equally capable of carrying load but Connect would surpass its rival in speed comparison. The maximum suitable speed for Cup is up to 186 mph but Connect can surpass this limit without losing optimal traction.
Rolling Resistance and Fuel Efficiency
The rolling resistance of a tire is the friction between the road and tire while it is rolling over it. The higher the rolling resistance, the more difficult it is for the vehicle to roll the tire forward/backward on the road. It means that more fuel will be consumed by the tire to overcome this resistance. The loss of energy in this scenario is usually known as hysteresis. And hysteresis is directly proportional to the contact patch of a tire.
By that definition, we can conclude that both of them are on equal grounds since they have an equal number of ribs, circumferential grooves, and a notch of the same width. Meaning that both of them have equal contact patches. Hence both of them would be phenomenal fuel-efficient tires.
Price
The cost of Cup is comparatively higher than its competitor which is unjustified since its competitor has superior wet traction, tread pattern, durability, and speed rating. And there is also the fact that the Connect is the advanced version of Cup which is installed with Track Connected Technology. Considering all that, we can state that Connect is a very good option from both an economical and performance perspective.
The cost of Sport Cup 2 (245/35R19) and Sport Cup 2 Connect (245/35R19) are 457.74 $ and 418.02 $ respectively.
Quick Summary
Both competitors have;
- Similar tread composition.
- Equivalent dry grip.
- Equal treadwear rating which indicated tread depleting rate.
- Equivalent load-bearing capability.
- Equal rolling resistance.
Sport Cup 2 has;
- Superior tread design.
- Better wet grip.
- Better wet handling.
- Superior durability.
- Higher speed rating.
Sport Car 2 Connect provides;
- Better dry handling.
- More comfortable and quiet journey.
- Comparatively low price.
