When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
static vs dynamic tolerances - had success with a stationary setup only to have rub at speed with bumps and road contours ... hopefully it works out for you; I see in the other thread you've worked through all this geometry significantly
11" rim (bead to bead) = 12" overwall width x 25.4mm = 305 optimal tire size
This means I will probably not go with a 315, and explains why everyone goes with 305 as it's optimal for an 11" rim.
9.5" (bead to bead) = 10.5" overall x 25.4mm = 267 so rounding to a 265 optimal tire size. The factory nailed this one.
10" wheel = 11" overall x 25.4 = 279 rounding up or down you get 275 or 285 optimal tire size, explains why everyone goes with those on the front with a 10" wheel. But I dont' like the scrub radius of this combo - it's squirly at ET 10 and too sunk in ET 25/30.
So...
If 10.5" wheel fits up front then that's perfect for a 295, and srub radius gos inwards back to almost stock location.
If 10.25" wheel fits up front then 285 will work, and again scrub radius goes back inward almost to stock location.
Rear at 11" = 305. Or 315 with a tiny bulge. Hmm.
After that's decided, 30 or 35 series? Argh, more pics and youtubes to watch!!!
11" rim (bead to bead) = 12" overwall width x 25.4mm = 305 optimal tire size
This means I will probably not go with a 315, and explains why everyone goes with 305 as it's optimal for an 11" rim.
9.5" (bead to bead) = 10.5" overall x 25.4mm = 267 so rounding to a 265 optimal tire size. The factory nailed this one.
10" wheel = 11" overall x 25.4 = 279 rounding up or down you get 275 or 285 optimal tire size, explains why everyone goes with those on the front with a 10" wheel. But I dont' like the scrub radius of this combo - it's squirly at ET 10 and too sunk in ET 25/30.
So...
If 10.5" wheel fits up front then that's perfect for a 295, and srub radius gos inwards back to almost stock location.
If 10.25" wheel fits up front then 285 will work, and again scrub radius goes back inward almost to stock location.
Rear at 11" = 305. Or 315 with a tiny bulge. Hmm.
After that's decided, 30 or 35 series? Argh, more pics and youtubes to watch!!!
30 and you're closer to the BRC.... (bent rims club)
but I can move the 295/30 rears to the front and be cheap, er, frugal lol
I always wonder if the weight of the engine over the front wheels makes the front wheels more prone to cracking or bending…as well as the fact that they plow into the deviation in the road versus being dragged over it like the back wheels.
The cords are really showing on the fronts, I don't think there is more time to dink around. So for now I'm getting 285/35 and 305/35 on stock rims. Yeah yeah go ahead and fill the thread with "bulge" and "sidewall danger" and "skating" and all that. I get it, it's just kinda a 1-2 month test before winter to get a handle on the look. If I like the added height of the 35 series tires I can fix the rim widths over winter.
I also ordered a cheap replika 10.5" wheel with ET40 to play with spacers on the front for tires V2.0. Crawling around under the car more today with a straight edge it looks like it just might work!
Extremely hot weather will raise even more risks on those old worn tires
+1
Luckily I have an extra car to drive until Sept so the wagon has been parked. Hopefully new tires and alignment this week. Too much mental gymnastics over one small thing, and will probably come to the same conclusion in the end as everyone else regarding width and offset. Haha.
I did the opposite with the factory wheels lol. I took the factory 10 spoke off, and after 9 months of searching found a set of pretty mint OEM black forged wheels.
What is crazy is, I like your wagon with the ten spoke wheels better. However, on my sedan I like the black forged wheels better. It is so weird because both of our cars are silver. LOL.
i don't see any of that part number for sale anywhere. do you know if A2304012702 would fit the E53/E63? it's 6.5Bx19 ET14
That part number is for a W212 spare. You will need different lug bolts for sure; the stock ones will not work with that spare.
I regret not trying the 212 sapre on the 213. That 212 spare is amazing how it collapses when it deflates. Real space saver.
Someone with a 212 needs to try the spare on a 213 please - just make sure not to mess up your hub using 213 logs that will be way too long for threading in (212 wheel faces are a lot thinner).
I always wonder if the weight of the engine over the front wheels makes the front wheels more prone to cracking or bending…as well as the fact that they plow into the deviation in the road versus being dragged over it like the back wheels.
but I hear ya
More than likely yes as that is why MB has the pressures high on the front tires... even without top speed runs. you are looking at the 41 PSI for the front and 35 for rears.
I always wonder if the weight of the engine over the front wheels makes the front wheels more prone to cracking or bending…as well as the fact that they plow into the deviation in the road versus being dragged over it like the back wheels.
but I hear ya
Originally Posted by figuwx
More than likely yes as that is why MB has the pressures high on the front tires... even without top speed runs. you are looking at the 41 PSI for the front and 35 for rears.
Which is strange because I heard bmw has the rear pressures higher than the front, despite being the same front engine layout.
Originally the dealer said they could not fit the rear tires without using the 12.5mm spacers.
I did not like the look and also experienced some rubbing on the outside of the tires on suspension compression during large dips.
I was able to remove the rear spacers and the tires fit fine.
The original plan was to widen the wheels over winter 11” rear and 10.25” front but that would necessitate running 15mm spacers front and rear. I’m kind of liking the no-spacer life and think I can see past the poor non-flush fitment with some lowering.
So far it’s lowered to -25mm front and -15mm rear and zero rubbing. I will play with the heights to nail the look.
Here are some pics with rear spacers at stock height:
12mm spacer stock height
12mm spacer stock height
12mm spacer stock height
And here are some pics no spacers and lowered:
Front -25mm Rear -15mm no spacers
Front -25mm Rear -15mm no spacers
Front -25mm Rear -15mm no spacers
Last edited by I.T. Guy; Aug 27, 2025 at 12:37 PM.
In a perfect world for my taste I’d love 5-7mm more rear aggressive offset and 15-18mm front.
I just don’t want to mess with scrub radius and spacers or aftermarket looking wheels so this is the compromise.
Since the wheels are centered again like MB engineers designed all the WOT is buttery smooth, no skittish squirming and darting. Everything is perfect again. Except the fitment
Last edited by I.T. Guy; Aug 28, 2025 at 09:09 PM.
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.
