Your tire numbers are flat out wrong!
Most new tires have 11/32" or 10/32" tread, not 8/32" or 9/32".
You are underestimating the tread depth by more than 25%.
I don't think that most people wait until their tires are bald (2/32") to replace them.

I garage my vehicle every night. The daytime sun is still an issue. (I don't live in the land of the midnight sun.)
According to the tire industry:

• New tire tread depth 11/32" or 10/32" - optimal traction and safety
• Good tire tread depth 9/32" to 5/32" - adequate traction and safety, reduced grip and braking on wet roads
• Time to replace tire 4/32"
• Bald tires 2/32" - unsafe, legal minimum in most states

I drive on wet roads almost every day. I err on the side of safety.
I maintain my vehicles according to the manufacturer's recommendations. I'm sure a lot of people do.
I drive about the average number of miles per year which is less than 7,000 for the over 60 demographic here.
The E300 is a town car driven about 3k miles, a GM truck rental is a work truck driven about 1k miles and various vacation rentals account for the rest.

My demographics are typical for a person living in my zip code (pop. 20k).

 

I have no idea where you getting tread depth of between 10.5 and 11/32. Maybe this is not for RF

For the Michelin - Primacy Tour A/S RF the tread depth is 8.5/32

see https://tires.costco.com/Product?Ite...pect=45&rim=18

For the Michelin - Pilot Sport RF 9.5/32

see: https://tires.costco.com/Product?Ite...pect=45&rim=18

For the Michelin Primacy 3 RF 9/32

see: https://tires.costco.com/Product?Ite...pect=45&rim=18

For the Bridgestone - Driveguard Plus RF 9/32

see: https://tires.costco.com/Product?Ite...pect=45&rim=18

I stand by my statement that when you change your tires at 5/32 you are doing so still having between 40% and 50% of tire tread life left.

Again driving less than 3,000 miles per year, regardless of age, makes you unique and not representative.

But what is most important is that you evaluation of RF vs. non RF is based on local stop and go traffic, not highway conditions. As I posted, I do not have your powers and I for one cannot tell the difference in tires at 20/25 mph as you claim.

For the rest of us evaluations at highway speeds is far more important than stop and go traffic at 25/30 mph.

Most if not all of the complaints about ride quality of RF is where the wheel is not the standard 18". As posted each increase in wheel size of one inch, is a 1/2 inch decrease in sidewall. This decrease in sidewall, not RF, is the primary reason why the ride deteriorates.

 

Ride comfort is so subjective, for example, I have upgraded 19” tires and runflat, I find the ride to be comfortable over small potholes and on the highway. Over big potholes, it is terrible. Going from runflat to conventional tire will make the ride softer and give up some handling.

 

So true. Let's not forget that the population of MB owners on this forum is finitely small and such stats here don't amount to much. The reality is greater proportion of owners are good with RFs... I am good with mine, as the ride with air suspension is pretty good for me.

YMMV

 

Local traffic here drives at 30 to 50 mph. Only school zones have speed limits below 30, the default residential speed limit in Florida. I drive on "local" interstate highways ( I-75, I-275, I-4) almost every day. When I had the run flat tires there wasn't much difference between ride on the various roads. The ride quality was worse than the non run flat tires. The run flats were also noisier. My cars have/had either 17" or 18" wheels while the SUV had 15" wheels. I've never owned a car with wheels larger than 18".

From Tire Rack "Average new tires used on cars typically start with 10/32" to 11/32" of original tread depth. Dedicated winter / snow tires and light truck tires typically are deeper (for light truck tires, how much deeper depends on the tire's tread type."

The mileage is typical for each car in a multivehicle setting. When my wife had a C280 she put about 3k miles on it and 4k miles on her SUV annually. That is very typical for drivers in Clearwater, 7k per annum. We are a densely populated city so virtually all services are located nearby making trips very short.

 

Do you have a point to make?

Who cares about averages when I gave you specifics for Mercedes W213 with 18" wheels. These are actual tires for our cars. At 5/32 inch more than 40% of the tread life is left.

You are unique driving mostly local and 2,500/3,000 miles per year. Accept that your experience is different from most others and congratulations on being able to feel the difference between RF and non RF in local traffic!

 

I lived in Clearwater for 20 years and agree that most trips were short. I could be watching football on Sunday and run to Publix for supplies during half time and be back before the 2nd half started. My job was 5 miles from my house but could take 30 minutes to get there going down Belcher and Ulmerton. Gulf To Bay and East Bay are light to light with busy times taking 2 to 4 cycles before you get through one light. All this is very hard on a car but easy on tires. Road surfaces in Clearwater are excellent verses roads in the north due to no salt and ice destroying them in the winter. I miss the winters there but don't miss the constant traffic. Low mileage cars in that area are suspect in terms of abuse since idling in traffic and barely getting over 30mph on most trips are very rough on cars. Gotta go across the Howard "Frankenstein" or the Causway just to blow the exhaust out only to be met with the stop and go traffic on the Tampa side. I was there last September and feel it's a bit improved on 19 but once you get off it's terrible. I'll be there in a few weeks and not looking forward to the local driving. It just seemed normal after 20 years but now living in the country where I can drive 20 miles in 20 minutes, it seems like madness.

 

The first 3 tires I checked at Tire Rack for my '18 E300 245/45-18. All have a tread depth of 10/32" - Pirelli P Zero AS Plus 3, Continental Extreme Contact DWS 06 Plus and Michelin Pilot Sport All Season 4. Maybe Costco sells "special" tires. My driving is typical for drivers in Clearwater, FL. I don't care about long distances to services elsewhere.

Tires need replacement when tread depth is below 4/32" or the sidewall show signs of weather checking. Useable tread is the amount from 4/32" and up. You might like to squeze an extra 1/32" of tread life from your tires, but the risk isn't worth it to me. Dirving on tires with the wearbars showing (2/32") is illegal in most states. Have you ever had a blowout at high speed? I have and it isn't fun.

 

Complete BS:

The tires at Costco are the same as on Tire Rack. The tires you shown are not RF.

Sidewall shows signs of weather cracking, what we used to call "dry rot" as I posted does not happen until after 7 or 8 years and certainly not in 4 years or 10K miles - unless you leave the car outside 24/7 in the dessert!.

Driving with more than 2/32" of inch in all states is legal: your statement otherwise is contrary to fact.

Blowouts at high speed are not fun: Did you just figure that out?

Again we get it:

• You drive less than 3K miles per year and not over 50 mph
• You can tell the difference in local traffic between RF and non RF
• Out of extreme caution you will replace your tires at 5/32 " even though 40% to 50% of the tread life remains
• Out of extreme caution, and for fear of blowouts, even though at four years there is no sign of "dry rot" in your tires, you replace them

Could it be that you prefer non RF because they cost half of what a RF costs and since you change the tires every 10K miles, you save a lot of money? (I know you posted you carry a spare!)

 

Love seeing this JKT guy post on this forum, the magical Mercedes Benz technician who knows it all. I face palm everytime this guy posts on this forum. I'm really starting to think @Massimo Here cloned him self into this guy.

@ua549 I agree with you 100% that temperatures DO affect the wear on a tire, and they also affect the chemicals in the compound which in return cause dryness which in return causes cracking in the sidewalls. JTK or whatever has clearly never driven winter tires in warmer weather. They will wear down like crazy. every manufacturer will explicitly state NOT to drive winter tires in warmer weather above lets say 55 degrees because they WILL wear out due to them becoming too soft. Same goes for all season tires/high performance summer tires in 112F weather. Warmer weather will cause the rubber to become softer, thus making them more grippy, but more prone to wearing out. It's basic science. Almost like listening to Mercedes when they tell you not to put 87 octane in your car that was built for 91+ octane (had to throw that in there).

As for his stupid comment about you driving mostly in the city, i don't know what university this dude graduated from, but most potholes/bumps/cracks are ON CITY ROADS. Not on highways. You will want a more comfortable tire in the city than on the highway. So i'm not sure why he's pointing out the fact that you drive short distances and in the city when you specifically mentioned that you drive under 50MPH and think that it's a valid speed for testing out tire comfortness? Makes 0 sense. Maybe he should leave long island NY and go to the Bronx or NYC once in a while. I'm sure he'll feel every single pothole 10x more in his 18" run flat tire than I will in my non-runflat 19" Continental PureContacts (Amazing tire BTW, I highly suggest it).

$100 says he'll comment how his 18" run flats are 1/2 inch more sidewall than my 19" tire. $100 says he doesn't know that no matter what size run flat you run, it'll always be a worse ride than a tire size up without run flats. It's just pure logic. Run flats have a hard side wall. Non-run flats don't. most of the impacts/vibration/noise/cushion happens WITHIN the sidewall of your tire. Literally no point in anything he's saying.

As for your question @brucew444 - I would suggest you stick with your 2014. I had a 2014 E350 that I absolutely beat on every single chance that I got. It lasted me 190,000 miles (bought it brand new) until I decided to sell it. I regret that decision every single day. I love my W213, but it has FAR more problems than the W212. The newer Mercedes models are not in any way shape or form the same quality as the older models. But it's also a hit or miss. I agree the interior is a lot nicer on the newer models, but the old school elegance of the W212 is great, and you won't have a headache when you have to pay $5,000+ to replace your screen when it sh*ts the bed like I did, twice....

Whatever choice you make, I'm sure you'll be fine. but from my experience I've had a lot more problems with both my W213's than I did with my W212.

 

RF tires also have the same 10/32" tread depth. Tire Rack : Tire Comparisons

You are wrong. You've probably never lived in a tropical climate. The sun, heat and humidity damage tires very quickly.

My statement was 2/32" which is correct. You used a different measurement of more than 2/32". The fact is that it is illegal to drive on tires with 2/32" tread.

I've had high speed blowouts on tires with 4/32" tread and signs of weather checking that you consider safe, but as a result I replace tires sooner.

I drive more than 3k miles per year and at high speed on the open road, just not in my city car. If you can't tell the difference on a smooth road, you are either sitting on a fluffy pillow or you need a butt transplant. At 5/32" there is 20% of tread life remaining and 30% until bald.Aging tires harden, lose grip and are prone to hydroplaning and cracking. I'm proactive for safety.

Yes, I change tires every 4 years (10-12k miles) due to tire age, not tread depth. Your cost numbers are way off. A Pirelli P Zero non RF tire costs 29% less, not 50% less, than a Pirelli P Zero RF tire.

 

You must have had a porcupine for dinner!: On another thread, I see you really got into it with Massimo! (BTW I thought you were mostly correct), Obviously you have a great deal of time on your hands - and unlike Massimo I have no intention of going back and forth with you.

Choose who you want to listen to: I have 2,243 post and 722 likes. That means almost a 1/3 of my posts have been liked. The same cannot be said for you posts.

Obviously you did read my post #18. If you had you would have known that all I said was that most of the complaints about ride quality were from members who said they had 19" and 20" wheels and not the stock wheels 18". I also said the exception were those who had the air suspension. I never said a RF had the same ride as a non RF.

As you know an 245 X 45 X 18 tire that is the standard has a sidewall height of 4.33 inches. Going from 18" to 19" the sidewall decrease by .5 inches which is decrease of more than 11%. This decrease is sidewall, rather than the RF is the primary reason people complain about the ride.

UA549 then posted #20:

I replied that for someone who drives only locally, on smooth pavement in Florida at speeds between 25/35 mph, I found it remarkable that he could tell the difference between RF and non RF. In stop and go and/or local, I said I could not. I further said most of the complaints were not in stop and go and/or local traffic but on the road at highway speeds.

The rest of your post about winter tires, UA549 is in Clearwater, Florida doubt he uses winter tires, cracks in the road up north where you and I live vs.UA549 on smooth roads in Florida, breakdown in sidewalls after many years, are totally irrelevant and does not warrant any reply.

 

I have a house in Jacksonville FL and make my way down there too. Florida roads are no cake walk, so i'm not sure where you're getting your info from. Not as bad as New England roads but they're terrible down there as well. And the winter tires thing was to say how winter tires wear out more during the winter. I never said UA549 uses winter tires. It was to make a point about how tires wear more in higher temps. Just like UHP All Seasons and UHP Summer tires do as well.