E63 S212 4Matic - staggered front to rear tire circumference
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Sep 2024
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
2016 E63 S AMG Wagon
E63 S212 4Matic - staggered front to rear tire circumference
Shopping for new tires for my 2016 E63 S AMG wagon with 4-Matic and am thinking of going up 10mm tire size - specifically in the rear.
Current setup - stock
front 255/35 r19 circumference 2075mm
rear 285/30 r19 circumference 2052mm
error = 1.12% (larger on front tire)
Option 1
front 265/35 r19 circumference 2089mm
rear 295/30 r19 circumference 2070mm
error = 0.9% (larger on front tire)
Option 2
front 255/35 r19 circumference 2075mm
rear 295/30 r19 circumference 2070mm
error = 0.24% (larger on front tire)
Now, I've seen threads of guys using option 1, and others using different setups similar to the w213 e63, but none using option 2.
My question is, does the 4-matic system require some error where the front wheel circumference needs to be slightly larger?
To me, option 2 would be the best case where there would be minimal slip in the center diff.
Am I missing something? If I went with option 2, could I potential cause damage or NVH?
Any information would be much appreciated!
Current setup - stock
front 255/35 r19 circumference 2075mm
rear 285/30 r19 circumference 2052mm
error = 1.12% (larger on front tire)
Option 1
front 265/35 r19 circumference 2089mm
rear 295/30 r19 circumference 2070mm
error = 0.9% (larger on front tire)
Option 2
front 255/35 r19 circumference 2075mm
rear 295/30 r19 circumference 2070mm
error = 0.24% (larger on front tire)
Now, I've seen threads of guys using option 1, and others using different setups similar to the w213 e63, but none using option 2.
My question is, does the 4-matic system require some error where the front wheel circumference needs to be slightly larger?
To me, option 2 would be the best case where there would be minimal slip in the center diff.
Am I missing something? If I went with option 2, could I potential cause damage or NVH?
Any information would be much appreciated!
Out Of Control!!
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 13,799
Likes: 3,228
2014 E63S; AMS 100 octane ECU dyno tune; EDOK TCU tune; BB intakes; sprintbooster
This guy did it and was fine, from the sticky.
https://mbworld.org/forums/w212-amg/...ml#post7013279
Sticky:
https://mbworld.org/forums/w212-amg/...fixes-diy.html
Last edited by PeterUbers; Sep 18, 2024 at 10:06 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 310
From: NYC
E63S
You also need to take wheel width and tire brand (some brands are chunkier than others even though they are the same size) into consideration. Wheel Tire Size Calculator is a good place to research these matters.
Junior Member
Joined: Oct 2023
Posts: 61
Likes: 20
E63 Wagon
If your purpose is "styling", my comments do not apply.
If you actually have some curvey demanding roads near you, and occasionally drive "mini Mamooth" aggressively on curvy roads- like California backroads/caynos, then consider getting square setup.
Low profile tires are bad for many reasons: bad for comfort, bad for making the tires and wheels prone to damage by our truly monumentally bad roads, and general poor comfort. So no 20".
I would do 19x9.5 +35 mm circa offset lightweight wheels with 285/30x19 all around, to be able to rotate, and most importantly to gain front end grip.
First off, our cars chew front tires inside, camber and front wheel drive, both. So rotating will extend lifetime.
A 255 tire is better for rainy days, but 285 will provide maybe 5% more grip, that edge that we can all appreciate in tighter backroad turns/caynon road turns.
Rear wheels can be made to fit front, using hubcentric spacers, to bring the 52mm offset down to about 37mm offset, this has been tested to fit in front. 10" wheels I doubt will fit, that would have been otherwise my first choice.
Good luck in your pursuit.
If you actually have some curvey demanding roads near you, and occasionally drive "mini Mamooth" aggressively on curvy roads- like California backroads/caynos, then consider getting square setup.
Low profile tires are bad for many reasons: bad for comfort, bad for making the tires and wheels prone to damage by our truly monumentally bad roads, and general poor comfort. So no 20".
I would do 19x9.5 +35 mm circa offset lightweight wheels with 285/30x19 all around, to be able to rotate, and most importantly to gain front end grip.
First off, our cars chew front tires inside, camber and front wheel drive, both. So rotating will extend lifetime.
A 255 tire is better for rainy days, but 285 will provide maybe 5% more grip, that edge that we can all appreciate in tighter backroad turns/caynon road turns.
Rear wheels can be made to fit front, using hubcentric spacers, to bring the 52mm offset down to about 37mm offset, this has been tested to fit in front. 10" wheels I doubt will fit, that would have been otherwise my first choice.
Good luck in your pursuit.
Joined: Nov 2016
Posts: 7,847
Likes: 3,495
From: Maryland
2015 SL400 (M276 Turbo), 2014 C350 Sport (M276 NA), 2004 SL500 (M113), 2004 Audi TT225 (BEA)
Not sure if you have any kind of extended warranty or vehicle service contract (VSC), but if you do, be forewarned that the 3rd party VSC company may try to invalidate any claims if you use a different wheel and tire setup. Crazy as that seems, I had my VSC company initially deny a claim for a broken passenger seat because I had winter tires on the car at the time and had not purchased the custom tire rider. I immediately threw down the BS flag and pointed out that my winter tires were as specified in the Operator's Manual, the tires had nothing to do with passenger seat, the contract stated that cancellation could ONLY be the result of non-payment of the premium, and that the Magnuson-Moss Act generally prohibited warranty denial for non-related issues. (The Magnuson-Moss Act really only applies to new car warranties and manufacturers, but the principle is the same.) The company eventually approved the claim, but I had to fight them every step of the way. Prior to that, they had been good about covering claims.
