brandon1

My girl has a 2010 GLK350 with 19" wheels and its time for some new tires, so wanted to upgrade to some 20" wheels. Was looking at Niche Essen but little unsure of offset and tire size. Was thinking of a 20x9 et35 and 245/45/20 tire. Would this be a good fitment? Thanks for any advice.

Diabolis

20x9 ET35 with those tires will sit nice and flush with the fenders so the fitment is right. The only thing I'd look into is whether those specific wheels can safely take the weight of a loaded GLK. I have a set of forged BBS RS-GTs from my old Audi that are only rated for 675 kg (1485 lbs) per corner, and I wouldn't use them on the GLK. Just some food for thought. My aftermarket 20s for the GLK (also ET35) are rated for 1925 lbs. Look into whether Niche provides load info for their wheels.

Rdub

I would hesitate to go off stock/oem rims and tires, UNLESS SHE is really into it !! Most women (of all age ranges) that I know, are NOT into the tire and rim world as much as men are. The "outliers" that I know that do care are interested in it because of whatever relationship to the MEN that like it do. So IF YOU will be the one to deal with all the issues....

Calivette2003

My question is how will the tire/wheel well gap look? The service loaner I have now has those 20"AMG rims with 235/45/20 P-tires. Decent enough but I have seen several forum members with 22x9 with 265/35/22 sets and no rubbing whatsoever. Even with sped bumps etc...according to them. I'm also afraid of spending $1600-2000 on a set of rims to find out the gap on the 20" rims looks goofy. Most would say well you have 20" stock rims on their now. I know but something visually changes when you go to an after market all chrome rim it changes everything and that rim gap becomes all that more noticeable. Thoughts??

Diabolis

I presume the gap you're talking about is the one beween the brake rotor and the inside of the rim. If you size your wheels and tires right, the overall wheel and tire diameter should not change when you upsize or downsize, so the gap between the vehicle and tire stays the same (i.e. 235/60-17, 235/55-18, 235/50-19 or 235/45-20 all have the same overall diamater and will thus have the same gap between the tire and the vehicle body).

Anything larger than a 20" wheel will IMHO look ridiculous though, and moreover will likely result in a bent or broken rim the moment you hit the first pothole as there simply won't be enough tire to protect the rim itself. Plus, trying to find tires with the correct load rating in the larger (20"+) sizes - and thus smaller sidewall - is not going to be easy.

Calivette2003

Yes thank you you're absolutely right on The gap or fitment issue I verify the diameters on the Pirelli website and they all have the same outer diameter I guess the difference was on one GLK-350 forum member who has 265/35/22"' and the gap in the wheel well looks extremely tight compared to a stock vehicle. With all that said I think I'm going to stick with the stock 19 inch rims and tires because I drove my GLK all around San Diego this weekend and it drove a hell of a lot smoother than the loaner with the AMG 20 inch rims and I didn't notice any difference in cornering

Diabolis

There really isn't that much of a handling difference even between 235/60-17 (my winters) and 235/45-20 (my summers). I made the swap a couple of weeks ago, and aside from the ride being considerably harsher with the 20s, handling-wise it's hardly noticeable even you toss it in a corner like a sports car. The suspension setup affects the body roll a lot more than the tire profile.

The car looks really nice on the aftermarket 20s, but any larger would IMHO look pretty silly.

Calivette2003

I was seriously looking at the infinity FX 37 or QX 70 prior to the GLK and the difference in handling was outstanding unfortunately the infinity though I personally think it looks better from the outside drives like a truck while the GLK sits on a C series sedan chassis and handles like a car should my other two SUVs the XC-90 and the Murano drive like trucks and although they have 22's they still handle horribly I just don't want to have to deal with vibrations anymore

Diabolis

The car-like handling is exacly why I also bought the GLK. It drives more like a regular car than any other SUV I've driven with the possible exception of the Porsche Cayenne (including an ML63 AMG that I've had a chance to drive around various race tracks). The chassis geometry, weight distribution and suspension setup on the GLK are just right. There's very little body roll yet the ride is quite compliant, especially with the smaller wheels.

Calivette2003

Sir,
Thank you for your replies I completely agree with your last assessment there was nothing close to the GLK as far as handling was concerned. The FX 37 or QX-70 was a tad bit faster but the fuel economy suffered by 3 mpg and the price differential was 7000 more for similiarly equipped Infinity (Nissan).

Being my first Benz I am honestly worried about the maintenance. I drove my 2005 Nissan Murano for 10 years I put less than $3500 into maintenance entire time I owned it and never once had to change the brake pads, Alt, PS pump etc. I hope I can say the same for the Mercedes.

Diabolis

Let's hope that it gives you lots of trouble-free miles. Sure, on a MB forum you're always going to read about this or that issue, but when you take into account the number of GLKs sold, overall it's actually a very realible vehicle. Just don't skimp on scheduled maintenance.

10 years might be pushing it a bit though seeing as (a) you bought an entry-level car, and (b) every manufacturer these days builds everything to fit a certain price point. $3500 *may* get you through the first five years, but almost certainly not ten. And, are you telling me that you never had to replace the brakes or the timing chain (scheduled interval on the Nissans was ~120-140K miles IIRC) during 10 years on your Nissan? If that's the case, you were just plain lucky. I don't think there's s single car made on the planet today that would average $3500 in maintenance over a ten year period. Sorry to dissapoint you, but I think your expectations in that regard are more than a little unrealistic. And, keep in mind that you bought a premium vehicle, not a Kia - so expect the maintenence to be proportionately higher.

Calivette2003

No Actually still own the Murano and at 84,000 miles the only thing done to it was replacing front end ball joints, lower swing arms, fix a power steering hose that leaked and the average fluid, filter changes. No I'm not being unrealistic I'm just hoping the GLK maintenance is not ridiculous as many have warned me.

My buddy has a 2013 GLK and a 2014 C3?? sedan, both needed brake pads at 20K and my Murano has original pads at 84,000K and I use it to tow with.

Diabolis

First-generation GLKs had their share of "teething problems" like all new cars on the market. The facelifted cars have received a number of updates so I would expect them to fare a little better, but again there weren't any huge problems with the first-gen GLKs so I suspect people's expectations are somewhat unrealistic. It's an entry-level premium car, and if you're moving to MB from a Kia, Honda, Toyota or some American tractor then yes, you may find the maintenence costs on the high side.

I can't comment why your friend's brake pads only lasted half of what they should have. Average life span of an average set of brake pads is about 40-50K miles and double that for the rotors. 84K miles is extreme to say the least and defintiely not the norm on any car (Nissans included).

I don't know what would constitute "ridiculous" in your book when it comes to service costs, but on a $50K premium brand vehicle I would expect to spend about $750 a year on average during the first 5 years and perhaps $1-1.5K a year thereafter as bigger things start to fail or wear out. So, I would expect to spend under $4K during the first five years of ownership, and probably another $7-8K during the following five. If you're basing your expectations on what you spent on your Nissan, then yes, you'll probably find spending four times that amount ridiculous. On the other hand, every premium Europeran import I've owned and kept for that long has probably cost me $12K over ten years (some have cost me three times that - that's what I call ridiculous), so I would consider $12K normal. The moment the warranty runs out, you're looking at higher maintenence costs assuming that you want to keep the car in the same condition after 10 years as it was the day you bought it (as in, say, a light in one of the window switches on the driver's door burns out and you replace the entire window switch assembly) using all OEM parts and paying for labour at the dealership.