marcmc8867

All:

I went and looked at 2015 S550s yesterday at the dealer. One question thing that came up that confuses me is the OE tires that come with the Sport Package 20" wheels.

All of the cars (including 4Matics) I looked at had staggered Goodyear 20" tires that appeared to be summer tires by the looks of the tread pattern.

I would have expected that S550s, especially 4Matics, regardless of Sport Package, would come with All-season tires since most people would want all-season capability.

Even with 4Matic, summer tires wouldn't be appropriate in winter weather and the average buyer would probably assume that by choosing 4Matic, they'd be in good shape for winter.

Does anyone else find this odd?

Could it be that cars delivered to my part of the country (NC) get summers tires while other regions get all-seasons??

Any info or input would be appreciated.

jrpisha

My 2015 S550 4MATIC was built the first week of July and is on it's way to me now. I ordered it with the sports package and the 20" AMG multi-spoke wheels. The car left the factory shod with run-flat high-performance summer tires, no options to mount different tires from the factory. I did negotiate with my dealer to have the runflats removed & replaced with high-performance all-season tires installed at no charge to me - prior to me taking delivery of the car.

I live in Michigan. Not sure if the car's delivery destination plays a role in what tire any given vehicle will be assembled with...

LovinMercedes

I am confused a little by what you said. I thought the only MB approved conventional 20 inch tire is the Dunlop SP Sport Maxx GT and that too, is a summer performance tire.

What are you putting on your car?

jrpisha

I'm having the dealer install a staggered 20" set of Hankook's Ventus S1 noble 2's. These are tire rack's highest rated high-performance all-season tires in the 20" setup for the S550. I have confirming emails from my SalesPerson that this swap will be made prior to me taking delivery & at no cost to me. I don't get the keep the OE run-flats, but I didn't want them in the first place.

I've seen the same documents that you have - noting that the Dunlop is the only MB approved conventional tire for the 20" setup. Not sure of the approval path at my dealership, but I've been assured this will happen.

Maybe I'm living in a fool's paradise, but I'm keeping my fingers crossed that the dealership will honor their commitment...

marcmc8867

When you guys mention "conventional" tire, are you referring to all-season?

jrpisha

No. In my mind:

Conventional tire = traditional construction, non runflat
Runflat tire = super stiff sidewalls that allow driving when tire is damaged or otherwise deflated, heavier, more unsprung weight

marcmc8867

Ah yes, gotcha.

Thanks

LovinMercedes

I think when push comes to shove, if they think about it, they won't do it although I am sure their intentions are good.

I would just make sure you are not voiding some type of warranty by doing this. From my conversations with MB Montvale they are very specific when they say they will only allow the Dunlop as a replacement tire.

I do not know what it means when you put an non-approved tire on a car and something happens. I am also not sure what an insurance company would say about putting non-approved tires on a car and then paying out a claim on something related to that.

None of my business really but I think you might want to look into these things.

jrpisha

You raise some great points & I'm really not sure about any of them. I will dig deeper into the warranty questions...

MTrauman

It's possible that MBUSA is not involved at all.


In that case, whatever is negotiated should stand I would think at the dealer level with swapping tires. Maybe the dealer is going to use the $2500 "slush fund" to cover any extra costs. Or maybe the Hankook tires are less expensive then the OEMs and the dealer will resale the OEMs and make a profit. I used Hankook Ventus on my 2008 S550 4Matic and the dealership told me they were not approved but it certainly did not void any of my warranty from MB.


MBUSA and the dealerships are funny about these tire issues. For them it is important to use only their approved tires for recertifying the cars for Certified Pre-Owned (CPO) cars so they might be more particular if the car is leased (I was told this by my local dealership's used car manager since I was negotiating with them to consign my 2008 S550 4Matic to their dealership and split any profit with the dealership over a certain amount--they would have had to put new MB certified tires on my car for them to CPO my car if I traded it in). But if you own the car outright or finance the car, you can do what ever the heck you want with the car and the tires will not void any warranty on the car itself as long as you get the proper size tires. I have been doing what I want with different tires for over 15 years of swapping different wheels/tires during the year for winter and summer seasons and I rarely have used the "recommended" tires from MB--I buy my tires from Tirerack usually. With that said, with all the negative discussion about run flats I have to chuckle abit. This might be the first time in 15 years that I actually like the Continental OEM runflats on the 19"AMG wheels that came with my '14 S550 4Matic--I am picky about tires and wheels. They worked extremely great in the harsh winter this year and they seem to not suffer from all the bad comments about the 20" runflats. So I am extremely happy with my Continental 19" runflats on the AMG wheels.

LovinMercedes

Hmmm... if I were a betting man...

I can't believe that the fine print somewhere, or some State court common law, does not provide for some sort of consequences for using non-approved parts when it comes to warranty and/or damages/liability. I would be even more concerned on an insurance claim where, heaven forbid, we are talking about large sums of money and liability.

These types of things are usually not an issue, until someone wants it to be an issue, and it is usually over money.

I am not a lawyer so I am going to make some inquiries to see if I can determine if my hunch is right or wrong.

Also, run flats are fine on the 19 inch. It's the 20 inch where you really start to feel the difference.

MTrauman

Certainly today anyone can be sued for almost anything! I realize that more than most since I have a law degree but not practicing law. I deal with tax law primarily as a CPA/financial planner.


But seriously---you mean MB can control which tires to use? By fear of lawsuits? I live in the US--looks like you live in CA. We still (although I wonder sometimes) have freedoms in the US. I would think of this in reverse. If MB wants to CONTROL ONLY their approved tires for use they better have good lawyers should something like the Firestone case and the Ford Explorer ever "rear its ugly head" again. But I am sure MB has good lawyers--it is just a matter of legal fees.

LovinMercedes

I think you are misunderstanding the point I am making.

If you own your car, you can do anything you want to do to your car. Nobody can tell you what to do with your property.

That being said, MB is entitled to dictate the terms of its conditions for warranty. You then have a choice. Take advantage of their warranty or do what you want to your car.

The point I am making is something like this. I know for sure, if you hire an unlicensed electrician to do electrical work in your house and then you have an electrical fire and your house burns down, you are out of luck if the fire can be traced back to the work done by the unlicensed electrical contractor. The insurance company does not have to pay the claim. Frankly, this seems logical because if insurance companies are going to pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars, or millions, they want to know you are doing things in the proper fashion and in this state, electrical work in a home needs to be done by licensed electricians.

On the car side, if MB says a certain tire is the only approved tire and you get a flat and this flat causes you to go off and run someone over and you are looking for your insurance company to pay millions on a death claim, my guess is that you better have approved tires or you are out of luck.

Additionally, if you get a flat and you cause property damage, and you are using an unapproved tire and try to say it wasn't our fault, my guess is that you are also out of luck here.

Using even the best of equipment in an unauthorized fashion doesn't seem to be a good idea to me. You are always welcome to exercise the liberties and freedoms you have in this country but when looking for reimbursement or protections from others, you need to follow the rules.

I don't think any of this is unreasonable. If you, heaven forbid, go off and kill someone with a MB car, you can rest assured MB is going to be sued for your actions, especially if this flat you had was with an unauthorized tire put on by a MB dealer. MB's position will be that the dealer is not an agent of MB corporate and their policies say you can't do this but of course, it will be hundreds of thousands of dollars proving this.

I am not a lawyer and obviously don't practice law either, but I have done enough business to understand how these principles work.

MTrauman

Yes your points are well taken especially with regards to an electrician and houses--completely agree with you on this point.


Also completely agree with you on MB dictating it's warranty terms--to my knowledge there is no fine print that voids your car warranty for using say Ventus instead of say Dunlop in the US. But this article was interesting--I remember reading an article that China MB approved Ventus but MBUSA has not approved Ventus (Hankook) tires. So it can be country by country and not just the manufacturer dictating what are "approved" tires. This has to do more with money/contractual deals then quality in my opinion since any of the tires I would use are of high quality.


I guess I am not worried about the issue you are getting at regarding voiding the warranty for use of non approved tires.


I have had too many discussions with dealers on this issue and am very satisfied that in my case I will not worry about voiding warranties since I have OVER discussed this with dealers. Think about this--I am the idiot who buys tires from Tirerack and has the MB dealer put my tires on at their dealership that sells tires--believe me I have had these discussions over and over and I am not worried about the warranty issue. And I have a great relationship with the dealer to the point they are ok putting tires on my car they don't sell but I do this sparingly as to not completely **** off the dealer. To counter my idiocy of having them put tires on they don't sell, I have purchased wheels and tire pressure monitor sensors from them so they are not completely pissed at me for being an idiot!


Bottom Line: I probably know too much about the legal system and too much about how these tires get approved--and why they get approved--to worry about me using a tire such as Hankook Ventus (that is MB approved in China but not the US as I recall).

LovinMercedes

I never understood how something could be approved in another country and then not in this country. I would think US regulations but then again, a tire either works or it doesn't work.

Frankly, I am not even sure what the parameters are for approving tires. Any help here?

RichM

There is no such thing as a "factory authorized" tire. OE tires first and foremost must meet the size and load rating the engineers set forth. Secondly, it meets the "price/performance ratio that car manufacturer requires. Even with MB, price is the key in mass production. As I write this I am working with my dealer in DFW spec'ing a 2015 S Class with the 20" wheel option. This comes from the factory with summer tires. Does this mean I must park my car when the temps drop below 45 degrees and these tires are no longer safe to drive on because these are the OE "approved" tires? Of course not. My dealer will replace the summer tires with an all season tire, or I have the option of buying my own. The dealer provided tire is not an "approved" tire as it does not come with the car, nor are they an option. How can the dealer do this and not open themselves or me to legal action as in your example? They meet the required size and load rating set by MB. The tire and wheel warranty that is offered with the OE tire is available with the all seasons.

The key when buying tires, and not open yourself to to the actions in the example above is to follow the size and load rating specifications set by the manufacturer of the vehicle.

MTrauman

Certainly lots of manufacturer's testing goes on to make sure manufacturers are comfortable with tires and their safety systems such as the stability control systems work with the tires being tested. I remember one MB dealer telling me that the tire I wanted to use was not on the APPROVED list and not RECOMMENDED due to it causing issues with the ESP (electronic stability control) system. One has to remember that these are BIG money contracts for tire manufacturers to become the OEM suppliers AND to get on the APPROVED list. That being said, many tires that are not the approved tires still have been tested and meet the requirements of the manufacturer for but for some reason or another (maybe money??) MB decides to approve certain tires.


The key is understanding what APPROVED means and what RECOMENDED or NOT RECOMENDED MEANS.


I think that if you were to put a tire on that you have been warned is NOT RECOMMENDED for causing problems with the ESP system and you have an accident tied to the ESP system then attorney's can have a great time arguing over this. One just needs to be reasonable in their understanding and application of what approved means.

TwinCam

I have a 2015 S550 on order for September delivery with the 20" multi spoke wheels. I wanted an approved alternate tire to replace the run flats before delivery at my expense. After numerous heated exchanges with Nadia M at MBUSA, a supervisor name Juan became involved. After numerous discussions, he stood firm that there is no approved alternate tire for the 2015 S550, and that includes the Dunlop tires referred to in previous discussions. He stated only run flats are approved for the 20" multi spoke wheel on the 2015 S550, regardless of what was done by Manhattan MB on 2014 models. Juan refused to say if the Dunlops were approved on the 2014 and said he would not discuss what was being posted on this web site regarding alternate tires. Pretty frustrating. I got nowhere with MBUSA.

MTrauman

The S class is one of the best (if not the best) cars on the market. I love my '14 S550 4Matic.


With that said, manufacturer's and distributor's like MBUSA have to deal with laws and product liability court cases that have set precedents over the years. Look at GM--what a mess they are dealing with. So there are many reasons you may not get very far with the nice people at MBUSA. They are just trying to do their jobs.


Now for what you should do since you will not get very far apparently with MBUSA as the US distributor of our fine autos--Buy the car with the tires they come with and negotiate with the dealer you bought the car from to switch out your tires for what you want. If that does not work, then on your own dime buy tires you want that fit the manufacturing specs. It is that simply since you may not get very far on this issue since (I am guessing) MBUSA may have had their accountants calculate the cost of doing this for everyone that requests help. This is about money--period. MBUSA does not want to spend their money on this issue. And don't forget all the regulations--such as CAFE stds that have to be met--maybe these tires need to be connected to the APPROVED list to qualify for the CAFE stds--this also applies to the annoying ECO button! So many questions and not many answers except you can do what you want to on your own dime and not MBUSA's dime.


There might not be any other APPROVED MBUSA tire but there are other alternatives that would work.

MTrauman

Take a look at this link about S Class runflats. This video was done by MBUSA.

MTrauman

I do appreciate your frustration. In the car business, MBUSA has the best customer service no matter what your frustration level is. I would be just as frustrated if I had been in your shoes.


But let me explain a different customer service group I dealt with in 2012 on the purchase of my new 2012 Ford F-150 pickup. This was Ford Customer Service (equivalent of MBUSA).


In 2012 I bought a Ford F150. Within the month of purchase I discovered the rear window defogger did not work. MB would have fixed this type of problem under warranty. Well the local Ford dealer (three miles from my house) put in a warranty claim. Guess what--the manufacturer blamed the dealer or me for breaking the little wires in the sliding rear window for the defogger since they said "it left the factory working". I argued with Ford and I argued with the dealer to no avail. This dealership happen to post pictures of it's vehicle on their website and before my purchase I downloaded all the pictures. It just so happened that either the dealer or the manufacturer put some type of delivery sticker on the back window. The dealer in dealer prep must have pulled this sticker off too quick and broke the little wire in the rear window defogger so that it did not work properly. Even with all this evidence I got nowhere with the dealer or Ford. In my 20 years of buying Mercedes product I have never had a horrible experience like the Ford experience. MB would have fixed the problem no questions asked (and probably worked it out between the dealer and MBUSA). Not Ford they simply did not want to spend their money to fix the problem or help work a solution for the dealer to fix the problem. On a brand new vehicle I was stuck with an inoperable rear window defogger--I still am pissed from two years ago about this situation.


So I feel your pain but MBUSA/MB is worlds better then Ford Motor based on my personal experiences. Just wanted to make you feel a little better.

jrpisha

Ok, I finally have my answers. After multiple conversations with my dealer's service manager, the regional MBUSA person, and my Salesperson - here's what I've learned.

1). The dealership is going to honor their commitment to replace the runflats that come with the car with the Hankook all-seasons that I mentioned earlier in this thread. The dealership is funding this, not MBUSA. Replacing the tires will not invalidate my new car warranty. I am buying the tire/wheel warranty & it will cover the Hankook's.

2). Warranty issues related to replacing the runflat with the Hankook all-seasons. None. MB only requires that the tires have sufficient load bearing capacity - as bore out by the load range and service description categories.

The tires that are branded as MO are not made by MB, only approved by MB. MB literature states that tires with MO designation provide for "optimum performance" properties. In some MO prefix'd tires, the tire dimensions may better fit the available space in the wheel arch - usually that means that a MO designated tire is a little narrower. Original equipment markings/branding/designations on a tire currently have no legal meaning, they ‘only’ qualify as manufacturer recommendations. There is no statutory requirement to abide by this recommendation.

Interestingly enough, the regional MBUSA person I spoke with said that they are far more worried about the aftermarket wheels people are putting on the S Class - or how people are altering OE wheels; MBUSA will decline warranty repairs if the OE wheels are altered. She said that the process of preparing for / applying chrome to alloy wheels affects the metallurgy of the wheel & weakens it.

MTrauman

Attached is a "Recommended" tire list published by Daimler AG for the W222.

LovinMercedes

I also spoke to the Service Manager at the dealership where I bought my last few cars and he told me the following:

1. He would put on non-approved MB tires but this would void the tire warranty from MB. I would still be left with the tire manufacturer warranty and any other insurance policy that covered those tires but I would not have the MB warranty on the tires. He seemed to feel this should be sufficient for someone.

2. Although he could not think of anything at the time, any damage that would be caused by a non-approved tire would not be covered under warranty.

3. He made it a point to tell me it would not void any other parts of the warranty like the engine, electrical, etc.

4. While he said he has never done this (remember it's California), he didn't sound like this would be that big of a deal. (just my interpretation of this conversation)

I spoke with my litigation counsel and explained to him my thoughts about using the non-approved tires and a resulting insurance claim. He was not impressed. He said while having an approved tire would be the safe way to go, a non-approved tire of similar quality would most likely prevail in an attempt by an insurance company to try to disallow a claim on the mere fact that it was not approved by MB. He said that was not the issue. The issue was one of whether or not the replacement item was of equal or better quality and most likely, the burden of proving it wasn't would fall upon the insurance company.

Bottom line, my hunch was wrong and MTrauman thoughts more accurately reflect what is most likely to happen. Sorry.

What jrpisha is doing should work out just fine.

Just my 2 cents. Please take it as such.

jrpisha

Thanks for the input & confirmation !