MOExtended tires
03-18-2012, 06:30 PM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML320
MOExtended tires
Gentlemen (and Ladies)
I own a 2009 ML 320 with 22k miles on it. Last week my wife called from side of highway with a tire problem. Went to rescue and sent a friend from tire store to meet me. Tire in question is Bridgestone Dueler 400 MO Extended. Tire came apart- Okay, stuff happens and at least she was only 25 miles from home. Spent the last week doing my home work and found;
MOextended not a run flat tire (as MB professed)
As we know no option for spare
It appears true run flat not an option
Mercedes blames Bridgestone
Bridgestone says " tire not a run flat and spec'ed by MB
Bridgestone will replace defective tire and other three (at Pro-rate)
But, Still not a run flat and now wife will be limited to 30 miles at 35 mph- not an option in Montana.
My problem-IF MERCEDES HAS COMPROMISED MY WIFE'S SAFETY TO THIS EXTENT WHAT ELSE HAVE THEY CUT CORNERS ON??????
Sorry,but I think we can agree that we've paid a premium to buy the best and I think that a chevy is at least as good.( I'm a dodge guy)
So solutions-
Get rid of her car, buy something else.
Trade in for new Mercedes- new model has spare( does that say anything?)
Put real RFT Tires on (say it will void warranty, bad handling,traction in snow, wet not good)
Please don't feel that I'm just a malcontent, I also own a 34 year old Ferrari and I think I have a pretty good understanding of business and tech. A car is only as good as it is made but why would a company like MB agree to sell a car/spec tires specific to that car that does not have a spare or run flat tires?
If any one has any suggestions I will listen and appreciate them. Further, If you are running these tires, please do your homework. If said tire had come apart at highway speeds my dear wife might not be with me, bill
I own a 2009 ML 320 with 22k miles on it. Last week my wife called from side of highway with a tire problem. Went to rescue and sent a friend from tire store to meet me. Tire in question is Bridgestone Dueler 400 MO Extended. Tire came apart- Okay, stuff happens and at least she was only 25 miles from home. Spent the last week doing my home work and found;
MOextended not a run flat tire (as MB professed)
As we know no option for spare
It appears true run flat not an option
Mercedes blames Bridgestone
Bridgestone says " tire not a run flat and spec'ed by MB
Bridgestone will replace defective tire and other three (at Pro-rate)
But, Still not a run flat and now wife will be limited to 30 miles at 35 mph- not an option in Montana.
My problem-IF MERCEDES HAS COMPROMISED MY WIFE'S SAFETY TO THIS EXTENT WHAT ELSE HAVE THEY CUT CORNERS ON??????
Sorry,but I think we can agree that we've paid a premium to buy the best and I think that a chevy is at least as good.( I'm a dodge guy)
So solutions-
Get rid of her car, buy something else.
Trade in for new Mercedes- new model has spare( does that say anything?)
Put real RFT Tires on (say it will void warranty, bad handling,traction in snow, wet not good)
Please don't feel that I'm just a malcontent, I also own a 34 year old Ferrari and I think I have a pretty good understanding of business and tech. A car is only as good as it is made but why would a company like MB agree to sell a car/spec tires specific to that car that does not have a spare or run flat tires?
If any one has any suggestions I will listen and appreciate them. Further, If you are running these tires, please do your homework. If said tire had come apart at highway speeds my dear wife might not be with me, bill
03-19-2012, 12:09 AM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
5 Posts
'03 A4 2.0 Stroker, '14 E63 S AMG, '10 E550, '10 S550, '03 C240
I must be missing something, because from what I know, nearly every W164 here in the states came with NON-Runflat tires and had a donut spare in the trunk.
How can they not fit a spare in your car?
IMO, Runflats suck tremendously! The ride, the handling and the noise are horrendous. Also, they wear out MUCH faster than any other tire and cost an arm+leg+toddler to replace.
How can they not fit a spare in your car?
IMO, Runflats suck tremendously! The ride, the handling and the noise are horrendous. Also, they wear out MUCH faster than any other tire and cost an arm+leg+toddler to replace.
03-19-2012, 09:44 AM
#3
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML320
Sir-
Not sure if mine is a W164 but it's a 2009 ML320 Bluetec. Apparently,the Ad Blue Urea Tank takes up the space that a spare would use so Mercedes deleted the donut spare and used a limited(very) version of a sort of run flat that's not a run flat at all. New (2012) Bluetecs have moved the tank and now have a spare. As you can tell, I'm pretty upset- Didn't expect this sort of thing from mercedes and after a week I still don't know where I'm going with this. I agree with your appraisal of true run flats and don't think they are an option. Thanks, bill
Not sure if mine is a W164 but it's a 2009 ML320 Bluetec. Apparently,the Ad Blue Urea Tank takes up the space that a spare would use so Mercedes deleted the donut spare and used a limited(very) version of a sort of run flat that's not a run flat at all. New (2012) Bluetecs have moved the tank and now have a spare. As you can tell, I'm pretty upset- Didn't expect this sort of thing from mercedes and after a week I still don't know where I'm going with this. I agree with your appraisal of true run flats and don't think they are an option. Thanks, bill
03-19-2012, 09:53 AM
#4
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Lake Tahoe
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
w164 (ml 500)
The new generation of RFT do have a better ride and in our experience they last as long as the Non RFTs. We have been running a Pirelli Snow & Ice RFTs on our old Range Rover (avg wear 40K) and have a set on the ML. I don't have any complaints about the ride, but do admit that in some snow conditions the ML (not the tire) dose not excel as did our Rover, or even our Audi A4. Again all have the same tires.
Also on the plus side of RFTs, on a cold night would you not rather have a extended mobile tire to get to a safe place or home, then sitting on the side of the road waiting for rescue and or changing it.
On the other hand I have to ask: Did your wife get a low/check tire pressure warning?
And I do agree that MBA should not call that tire an extended mobil tire. That's just fraud on there part.
Mark
Also on the plus side of RFTs, on a cold night would you not rather have a extended mobile tire to get to a safe place or home, then sitting on the side of the road waiting for rescue and or changing it.
On the other hand I have to ask: Did your wife get a low/check tire pressure warning?
And I do agree that MBA should not call that tire an extended mobil tire. That's just fraud on there part.
Mark
03-19-2012, 10:16 AM
#5
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML320
Sir-
No low pressure warning. Tire just came apart probably due to some defect. Other three also show signs of same defect. I also agree that a (real) run flat would be ideal for my wife's car because she's not gonna change a tire. But again, these tires are not run flat except in a very limited manner. When tire came apart the only option we had was to flat bed the car due to no spare and total unavailability of a replacement tire. Lucky this happen near home.
I have looked into run flats including Perrelli, but mercedes tells me that this will void my warranty because rfts are heavier on would place too much stress on the suspension. I really can't find an option that works. Bill
No low pressure warning. Tire just came apart probably due to some defect. Other three also show signs of same defect. I also agree that a (real) run flat would be ideal for my wife's car because she's not gonna change a tire. But again, these tires are not run flat except in a very limited manner. When tire came apart the only option we had was to flat bed the car due to no spare and total unavailability of a replacement tire. Lucky this happen near home.
I have looked into run flats including Perrelli, but mercedes tells me that this will void my warranty because rfts are heavier on would place too much stress on the suspension. I really can't find an option that works. Bill
03-19-2012, 02:38 PM
#6
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Lake Tahoe
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
w164 (ml 500)
I think you'er being feed a line from your service dept. so that they can sell you overprice tire thru the dealership. In fact I know this may be the case, I went thru MB Service Writers training a few year back. It was all about the Up-Sale. No I never became a Service Writer.
Mark.
03-19-2012, 03:19 PM
#7
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML320
Sir-
I don't think it's an attempt to upsell as they only allow me to replace Moextended tires with same. My research says that a true run flat is much heavier than these imitation run flats and has different grip/handling. Most seem to also require a different wheel too. Thing that really bothers me is that Mercedes knows these tires are a problem else why would they go to expense of redesigning the new 320's to use different tires and include a spare? I have been defrauded and am not given any options how to make this car safe for my wife. This from a company that claims to make only the best? I'll bet I'm not the only one out there with this problem, bill
I don't think it's an attempt to upsell as they only allow me to replace Moextended tires with same. My research says that a true run flat is much heavier than these imitation run flats and has different grip/handling. Most seem to also require a different wheel too. Thing that really bothers me is that Mercedes knows these tires are a problem else why would they go to expense of redesigning the new 320's to use different tires and include a spare? I have been defrauded and am not given any options how to make this car safe for my wife. This from a company that claims to make only the best? I'll bet I'm not the only one out there with this problem, bill
Trending Topics
03-19-2012, 08:52 PM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SoCal
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
5 Posts
'03 A4 2.0 Stroker, '14 E63 S AMG, '10 E550, '10 S550, '03 C240
Sir-
No low pressure warning. Tire just came apart probably due to some defect. Other three also show signs of same defect. I also agree that a (real) run flat would be ideal for my wife's car because she's not gonna change a tire. But again, these tires are not run flat except in a very limited manner. When tire came apart the only option we had was to flat bed the car due to no spare and total unavailability of a replacement tire. Lucky this happen near home.
I have looked into run flats including Perrelli, but mercedes tells me that this will void my warranty because rfts are heavier on would place too much stress on the suspension. I really can't find an option that works. Bill
No low pressure warning. Tire just came apart probably due to some defect. Other three also show signs of same defect. I also agree that a (real) run flat would be ideal for my wife's car because she's not gonna change a tire. But again, these tires are not run flat except in a very limited manner. When tire came apart the only option we had was to flat bed the car due to no spare and total unavailability of a replacement tire. Lucky this happen near home.
I have looked into run flats including Perrelli, but mercedes tells me that this will void my warranty because rfts are heavier on would place too much stress on the suspension. I really can't find an option that works. Bill
I'll tell you why:
"Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, Title 1, __101-112, 15 U.S.C. __2301 et seq. This act, effective July 4, 1975, is designed to "improve the adequacy of information available to consumers, prevent deception, and improve competition in the marketing of consumer products . . .." The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act applies only to consumer products, which are defined as "any tangible personal property which is distributed in commerce and which is normally used for personal, family, or household purposes (including any such property intended to be attached to or installed in any real property without regard to whether it is so attached or installed)." Under Section 103 of the Act, if a warrantor sells a consumer product costing more than $15 under written warranty, the writing must state the warranty in readily understandable language as determined by standards set forth by the Federal Trade Commission. There is, however, no requirement that a warranty be given nor that any product be warranted for any length of time. Thus the Act only requires that when there is a written warranty, the warrantor clearly disclose the nature of his warranty obligation prior to the sale of the product. The consumer may then compare warranty protection, thus shopping for the "best buy." To further protect the consumer from deception, the Act requires that any written warranty must be labeled as either a "full" or a "limited" warranty. Only warranties that meet the standards of the Act may be labeled as "full." One of the most important provisions of the Act prohibits a warrantor from disclaiming or modifying any implied warranty whenever any written warranty is given or service contract entered into.
This means that, under the provisions of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act of 1975, an automotive dealership/carmaker cannot void your warranty because your vehicle has been modified with aftermarket parts. They (the manufacturers) have to prove that the failure was the direct result of the installed aftermarket part. Unfortunately, too many folks have gone to a dealer to have warranty service performed on their modified vehicle only to have the dealer refuse to cover the defective items. The dealer usually states, that because of the aftermarket parts installed, the warranty is void (without even attempting to determine whether or not the aftermarket part caused the problem). This is illegal...period."
Quoted from this article:
http://autos.aol.com/article/warrant...rmarket-parts/
Tires cannot effect your suspension drastically enough to cause some form of failure unless you choose to run 30" wheels that have been chromed 3 times and weigh about 40 pounds each without tires. Even then the worst case is frying a wheel bearing(~$200 repair).
Don't worry about it, use whatever tires you want.
03-20-2012, 05:16 PM
#9
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML320
Absolutely FALSE.
I'll tell you why:
"Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, Title 1, __101-112, 15 U.S.C. __2301 et seq. This act, effective July 4, 1975, is designed to "improve the adequacy of information available to consumers, prevent deception, and improve competition in the marketing of consumer products . . .." The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act applies only to consumer products, which are defined as "any tangible personal property which is distributed in commerce and which is normally used for personal, family, or household purposes (including any such property intended to be attached to or installed in any real property without regard to whether it is so attached or installed)." Under Section 103 of the Act, if a warrantor sells a consumer product costing more than $15 under written warranty, the writing must state the warranty in readily understandable language as determined by standards set forth by the Federal Trade Commission. There is, however, no requirement that a warranty be given nor that any product be warranted for any length of time. Thus the Act only requires that when there is a written warranty, the warrantor clearly disclose the nature of his warranty obligation prior to the sale of the product. The consumer may then compare warranty protection, thus shopping for the "best buy." To further protect the consumer from deception, the Act requires that any written warranty must be labeled as either a "full" or a "limited" warranty. Only warranties that meet the standards of the Act may be labeled as "full." One of the most important provisions of the Act prohibits a warrantor from disclaiming or modifying any implied warranty whenever any written warranty is given or service contract entered into.
This means that, under the provisions of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act of 1975, an automotive dealership/carmaker cannot void your warranty because your vehicle has been modified with aftermarket parts. They (the manufacturers) have to prove that the failure was the direct result of the installed aftermarket part. Unfortunately, too many folks have gone to a dealer to have warranty service performed on their modified vehicle only to have the dealer refuse to cover the defective items. The dealer usually states, that because of the aftermarket parts installed, the warranty is void (without even attempting to determine whether or not the aftermarket part caused the problem). This is illegal...period."
Quoted from this article:
http://autos.aol.com/article/warrant...rmarket-parts/
Tires cannot effect your suspension drastically enough to cause some form of failure unless you choose to run 30" wheels that have been chromed 3 times and weigh about 40 pounds each without tires. Even then the worst case is frying a wheel bearing(~$200 repair).
Don't worry about it, use whatever tires you want.
I'll tell you why:
"Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, Title 1, __101-112, 15 U.S.C. __2301 et seq. This act, effective July 4, 1975, is designed to "improve the adequacy of information available to consumers, prevent deception, and improve competition in the marketing of consumer products . . .." The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act applies only to consumer products, which are defined as "any tangible personal property which is distributed in commerce and which is normally used for personal, family, or household purposes (including any such property intended to be attached to or installed in any real property without regard to whether it is so attached or installed)." Under Section 103 of the Act, if a warrantor sells a consumer product costing more than $15 under written warranty, the writing must state the warranty in readily understandable language as determined by standards set forth by the Federal Trade Commission. There is, however, no requirement that a warranty be given nor that any product be warranted for any length of time. Thus the Act only requires that when there is a written warranty, the warrantor clearly disclose the nature of his warranty obligation prior to the sale of the product. The consumer may then compare warranty protection, thus shopping for the "best buy." To further protect the consumer from deception, the Act requires that any written warranty must be labeled as either a "full" or a "limited" warranty. Only warranties that meet the standards of the Act may be labeled as "full." One of the most important provisions of the Act prohibits a warrantor from disclaiming or modifying any implied warranty whenever any written warranty is given or service contract entered into.
This means that, under the provisions of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act of 1975, an automotive dealership/carmaker cannot void your warranty because your vehicle has been modified with aftermarket parts. They (the manufacturers) have to prove that the failure was the direct result of the installed aftermarket part. Unfortunately, too many folks have gone to a dealer to have warranty service performed on their modified vehicle only to have the dealer refuse to cover the defective items. The dealer usually states, that because of the aftermarket parts installed, the warranty is void (without even attempting to determine whether or not the aftermarket part caused the problem). This is illegal...period."
Quoted from this article:
http://autos.aol.com/article/warrant...rmarket-parts/
Tires cannot effect your suspension drastically enough to cause some form of failure unless you choose to run 30" wheels that have been chromed 3 times and weigh about 40 pounds each without tires. Even then the worst case is frying a wheel bearing(~$200 repair).
Don't worry about it, use whatever tires you want.
I checked the weights, 3 lbs difference between Michelin rfts and the bridgestone pseudo run flat. Also close to $1000.00 difference for four. I think I will go with michelins and get rid of this vehicle. I really can't understand the poor decisions and bad treatmentthat Mercedes as given me.thanks for all your help, bill
03-20-2012, 08:43 PM
#10
Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Lake Tahoe
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
w164 (ml 500)
Bill
Bridgestone Dueler H/L 400 RFT (Highway All-Season)
N/A
Reviewer's
Avg. Rating:
Size: 255/50R19
Runflat - OE BMW use only (Yes you can use them on a MB too.)
Sidewall Style: Blackwall
Serv. Desc: 107H
Load Range: XL
UTQG: 300 A APrice: $244.00 (each)
Estimated Availability: In Stock
Qty:
Optional Road Hazard Program: Add $21.58 per tire
Add Road Hazard: $86.32
Set of 4: $976.00
Bridgestone Turanza ER30 (Grand Touring Summer)
7.6
Reviewer's
Avg. Rating:
Size: 255/50ZR19
Mercedes Extended (Runflat)
Sidewall Style: Blackwall
Serv. Desc: 103W
UTQG: 140 A APrice: $336.00 (each)
Estimated Availability: In Stock
Qty:
Set of 4: $1,344.00
Both ends of the pricing.
They seem to be out of stock of the Pirelli RFTs in the snow and ice, but I paid $1250 for mine.
Mark
Bridgestone Dueler H/L 400 RFT (Highway All-Season)
N/A
Reviewer's
Avg. Rating:
Size: 255/50R19
Runflat - OE BMW use only (Yes you can use them on a MB too.)
Sidewall Style: Blackwall
Serv. Desc: 107H
Load Range: XL
UTQG: 300 A APrice: $244.00 (each)
Estimated Availability: In Stock
Qty:
Optional Road Hazard Program: Add $21.58 per tire
Add Road Hazard: $86.32
Set of 4: $976.00
Bridgestone Turanza ER30 (Grand Touring Summer)
7.6
Reviewer's
Avg. Rating:
Size: 255/50ZR19
Mercedes Extended (Runflat)
Sidewall Style: Blackwall
Serv. Desc: 103W
UTQG: 140 A APrice: $336.00 (each)
Estimated Availability: In Stock
Qty:
Set of 4: $1,344.00
Both ends of the pricing.
They seem to be out of stock of the Pirelli RFTs in the snow and ice, but I paid $1250 for mine.
Mark
03-20-2012, 08:56 PM
#11
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML320
Yes sir-
I'd very much like the perillis but tire rack only seems to have them in a summer tire good to 32degrees. I've seen snow in every month of the year here so perillis only for my Ferrari. The brdgestones may be a true run flat but I can't confirm this with bridgestone or tire rack. Wouldn't it be funny if BMW used a real runflat from same manufacturer as Mercedes but BMW specs where higher than MB? However, I do appreciate this and all options, thanx, bill
I'd very much like the perillis but tire rack only seems to have them in a summer tire good to 32degrees. I've seen snow in every month of the year here so perillis only for my Ferrari. The brdgestones may be a true run flat but I can't confirm this with bridgestone or tire rack. Wouldn't it be funny if BMW used a real runflat from same manufacturer as Mercedes but BMW specs where higher than MB? However, I do appreciate this and all options, thanx, bill
04-13-2012, 06:35 PM
#13
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML320
Gentlemen
Update, after many calls and alot of homework, Mercedes will not cover their mistake.good news is my dealer will. While I am unhappy with Mercedes I will recommend my dealer Demarios in missoula montana-not many will go this far to satisfy. If anyone wants to learn from my knowledge,pls contact me at williamward@stonewerx.com
Update, after many calls and alot of homework, Mercedes will not cover their mistake.good news is my dealer will. While I am unhappy with Mercedes I will recommend my dealer Demarios in missoula montana-not many will go this far to satisfy. If anyone wants to learn from my knowledge,pls contact me at williamward@stonewerx.com
Last edited by bill ward; 05-04-2012 at 09:15 PM.
07-29-2012, 12:54 PM
#14
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
5 Posts
2011 ML350 Blueteck (Sold); 2014 E350 Wagon, Sport, Indigo Blue (Sold); 2021 GLC300, 2022 BMW X5
I have a 2011 ML350 Bluetec and got tire pressure warning today which took me to a local bridgestone dealer since it is Sunday. The kind gentleman that came out to help me informed me that I don't actually have the run flat version of the Dueler H/L but also that he was not familiar with the MOExtended version.
So I had planned to talk to my local dealer, Mercedes of Annapolis tomorrow but now I'm wondering what is on my vehicle and what to really say. I'm in the same boat of no space for a spare tire because of the adblue tank so I was driving around thinking I was on a full run flat tire and this seems to not be true.
Any helpful advice as I go see what they will say/do. It looked like there was something that was in my tire/punctured it to cause the low tire pressure but then I was thrown for a loop with the not a runflat comment.
Thanks,
dminahan
So I had planned to talk to my local dealer, Mercedes of Annapolis tomorrow but now I'm wondering what is on my vehicle and what to really say. I'm in the same boat of no space for a spare tire because of the adblue tank so I was driving around thinking I was on a full run flat tire and this seems to not be true.
Any helpful advice as I go see what they will say/do. It looked like there was something that was in my tire/punctured it to cause the low tire pressure but then I was thrown for a loop with the not a runflat comment.
Thanks,
dminahan
07-29-2012, 03:19 PM
#15
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML320
Diane-
The tires that come with our ml320's are marked MOExtended. This refers to a tire that can be operated. 18-30 miles at 25 MPH with 10 psi.
A run flat tire is marked as such and is rated to travel 50 miles at 55 MPH and 0 pressure. I was told these moextended were run flats and was blatantly lied to. The standards come from bridgestone and ISO . Bridge stone does have a raft called the dueller 400. I now have a set of these and although it's to soon to say how they will do in the winter or how long they will last so far I am pleased.( with the tires and my dealer Mercedes makes my blood boil) bill
The tires that come with our ml320's are marked MOExtended. This refers to a tire that can be operated. 18-30 miles at 25 MPH with 10 psi.
A run flat tire is marked as such and is rated to travel 50 miles at 55 MPH and 0 pressure. I was told these moextended were run flats and was blatantly lied to. The standards come from bridgestone and ISO . Bridge stone does have a raft called the dueller 400. I now have a set of these and although it's to soon to say how they will do in the winter or how long they will last so far I am pleased.( with the tires and my dealer Mercedes makes my blood boil) bill
10-01-2012, 09:27 PM
#16
Newbie
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Central Ontario
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
09 ML320 Blue Tec
Good thread
Thanks for all the help on this topic - I had 2 of 4 of these BS Duellers come apart in chunks on a used 04 ML320 BluTEC I picked up before a long vacation. I only replaced the 2 - the last 2 in Ontario - but was tempted to repalce all 4.Now I am onto the search for snow tires and rims.
10-04-2012, 01:20 PM
#17
Super Member
I have a 2011 ML350 Bluetec and got tire pressure warning today which took me to a local bridgestone dealer since it is Sunday. The kind gentleman that came out to help me informed me that I don't actually have the run flat version of the Dueler H/L but also that he was not familiar with the MOExtended version.
So I had planned to talk to my local dealer, Mercedes of Annapolis tomorrow but now I'm wondering what is on my vehicle and what to really say. I'm in the same boat of no space for a spare tire because of the adblue tank so I was driving around thinking I was on a full run flat tire and this seems to not be true.
Any helpful advice as I go see what they will say/do. It looked like there was something that was in my tire/punctured it to cause the low tire pressure but then I was thrown for a loop with the not a runflat comment.
Thanks,
dminahan
So I had planned to talk to my local dealer, Mercedes of Annapolis tomorrow but now I'm wondering what is on my vehicle and what to really say. I'm in the same boat of no space for a spare tire because of the adblue tank so I was driving around thinking I was on a full run flat tire and this seems to not be true.
Any helpful advice as I go see what they will say/do. It looked like there was something that was in my tire/punctured it to cause the low tire pressure but then I was thrown for a loop with the not a runflat comment.
Thanks,
dminahan
Did MB of Annapolis get back to you? I am also in the area and and shopping for tires.
Thanks for the discussion guys. I have 43k on the factory fake me out RFTLs i now read. Knock on wood no problems yet but can't decide what to replace them with.
I am thinking about conventional tires and keep some slime and a pump handy?
I am also annoyed MB would do this and not even give us the pump and slime kit included elsewhere in the world...
