How much tread depth difference is OK? Rear of RWD Mercedes

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
May 10, 2005
Messages
2,124
Location
Jupiter, Fl
My wife has slashed another rear tire on her '16 E400 sedan. Both rear tires were replaced at around 12K (around town) miles. The rear size/model is ContiProContact 265/35R18. The left rear was replaced again at around 16k? last year due to damage from losing pressure on the highway (posted about it here), now at 26K the right rear was cut by debris. The tire we pulled off looked totally fine - aside from the slash. In my mind, it looked like a good tire with deep tread. I received the replacement and it has significantly deeper tread. If the new tire is 10/32nds, I'm guessing the old one was probably 5/32nds. The snow/fine siping is gone, but the large tread blocks remain - the treadwear bars are almost half as tall as the tread. I'm curious how much difference is acceptable on a car like this (or any 2WD car on the driving axle)? Use is now a mix of a 40 mile round trip per day through town, 5 days a week and a 400 mile round trip every Saturday on the highway (~80+/- 5MPH).

I have never liked these tires, but when the rears wore out, the fronts were (and still are) good(ish). If I had realized that there was such a disparity between the two rear tires, I probably would have used it as an excuse to replace all four with something that actually stuck to the road. These look 'sporty', but when you push it, they plow and/or spin, and they don't last very long with regular driving. Compared to my similarly sized Pilot Super Sports, these are louder, don't stick as well, are more expensive, and don't even last as long. Now I've got one new one and three halfway worn out tires.

Now, the question is: do I need to replace the other rear. We don't see snow ever, but heavy rain is frequent. I'm pretty sure her car has an open rear diff. I know in the past it was common to see cars wear out the right rear tire faster than the left rear, I don't recall any issues related to that, but cars and tires are a lot different now.
 
No worries with regards to tread depth. I would worry if tread design were different and the car was driven at the limit but that's not an issue in this case.. Personally I can't stand Contis either.
 
I don't think so. I believe all of its limited slip behavior is via ESP through the use of the opposite brake.
 
1/4 INCH CIRCUMFERENCE difference is the maximum considered safe for AWD vehicles (VW, MB, Subaru, AUDI etc) for a typical size auto tire, that corresponds to ~ 2-3/32 inch. This information for ~ 2012 so things MAY have changed but doubt it. Ed
 
Ignor my above comment: If the differential is the open type then I would guess that the tire diameter shouldn't exceed 3/16 to protect the differential spider gears. Ed
 
Last edited:
It's RWD, the rear tires last half as long as the warranty. So if it has 26k, that's equivalent to 52k if you could rotate it. That's one of the drawbacks of RWD. Just for traction purposes, I'd just get two tires for the rear.
 
You've got one bad tire and one half worn.

If you don't like these tires, and the Pilots are cheaper - now is the time to put two new ones on the back...

Then, since it's a staggered set up, you can buy the fronts when you choose...

The Pilot Sports would be a great choice for your driving conditions.
 
I think you should run matched or nearly matched axle pairs.. esp. on drive tires.

I wouldnt sweat 1/32" or 2/32" but over 1/4 inch is quite abit of difference.
 
I would not ever consider it. Keeping the back of the car behind you is why you need the best tires on the rear. Especially RWD. If you have a RWD car with staggered F/R tires it is a bigger problem. If you 4 new tires, it doesn't take long for the rears to wear out quickly and always be short on tread depth compared to the front. Assuming that if you have staggered tires, it is probably a car capable of eating rear tires for lunch. I've got a couple.
An older Dodge Viper was a extremely dangerous car in the rain. It didn't take long to go through a pair of rear tires, plus no traction control, or stability control, which a must have on a RWD stagger tired car. They were marginally safe on dry roads.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by CBR.worm
My wife has slashed another rear tire on her '16 E400 sedan. Both rear tires were replaced at around 12K (around town) miles. The rear size/model is ContiProContact 265/35R18.


The 2016 E400 Sedan (RWD) came standard with 245/40R18/XL 97V tires on all 4 wheels. There is not a single 2016 MB model that spec'd 265/35R18 tires.

Just out of curiosity, why did you choose a non-standard tire size?

TIA
 
It is the optional, staggered tire size - it came from the factory this way. The fronts are 245/40R18 and the rears are 265/35R18.

I tried mixing different tires front and rear on her last BMW and the handling results were dangerous - I realized at that point that I would never have mismatched tires front/rear. So for me, the options would be to have two new Continentals in the back or replace all four with Pilots.

I measured the two tires last night, it wasn't as big a disparity as I thought, I guess the one that she slashed was worn more than the other side (which would make sense since it had a couple K fewer miles). They measured 7/32nds and just over 10/32nds.
 
Originally Posted by gaijinnv
Originally Posted by CBR.worm
My wife has slashed another rear tire on her '16 E400 sedan. Both rear tires were replaced at around 12K (around town) miles. The rear size/model is ContiProContact 265/35R18.


The 2016 E400 Sedan (RWD) came standard with 245/40R18/XL 97V tires on all 4 wheels. There is not a single 2016 MB model that spec'd 265/35R18 tires.

Just out of curiosity, why did you choose a non-standard tire size?

TIA


https://tiresize.com/tires/Mercedes-Benz/E400/2016/Sedan-Staggered-Tires/
 
wet traction will be skewed due to the age of rubber and potential depth of siping. I would at least second the above posts about doing the pair, or walking away from the contis with a pair of something else if you don' t like them. TR reviews and personal experience agree that contis have certain handling benefits from their construction but don't handle mishaps and debris well. I used to absolutely adore their MTB tires.
 
I ended up replacing both of the rears after all, I figured it wasn't worth losing sleep over. The next time they wear out I'll do all four.
 
This has always bothered me with any car using staggered tires, especially after a friend died running his Dodge Viper under a cable barrier on wet pavement, slicing him in half. As soon as you get a few thousand miles on staggered tires the rears will AWAYS have a lower tread depth, which on wet pavement is never good for the argument of keeping the best tires on the rear. It's just not possible on a RWD staggered tired car, when the deepest tread depth is required to be on the rear? With a lot of horsepower it can be a problem in no time. I have 2 cars with staggered tires, but I don't drive them in the rain if possible. If it's wet, you need to check up for the conditions. It always comes down to common sense, which many people do not have.
 
Last edited:
I put the new rear tires on 2 years earlier, but I had no idea as to their condition after the fact, and I will never get over it.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top