I Need new tires for my 98 C230.
The problem is the tire size. 205/60 15 with a load rating of 91
I can not find any good tire in that size. Three Mercedes dealers recommend Michelin Energy MXV4 plus. These look ok but from what I see not much better than the original Continental tires and I dont like them.
I live in Chicago so I need good all season tires. I would rather have all season than another set of just winter tires.
Any suggestions??

Remember the more performance bias you get the less All-season bias they are in compromise. If you want something more then just lite snow capabilties, forget about your H-rated tires, and drop down to something more of a touring tire.

If you still want a good tire, and that just accept whatever Snow capabilites are built into it, try the Dunlop Sport A2s

__________________
Chirag (Charlie) Patel
--------------------------------------------
- 03 Mercedes S600 Sport TTV12
- 97 Acura NSX-T
- 99 BMW E36 M3 w/500+ HP
- 04 Lexus RX330
- 04 Dodge Dakota Quad 4x4 V8

4 Sale:
- 99 BMW M3 E36 Coup with Dinan SC, Upgraded to an RMS Stage 3 with Aftercooler, 12psi, and 500+hp @ flywheel.

I did see those tires and they look good but the load rating is lower than the Original equipment. I dont want to go that way.
There may be no problem but a lower load rating could cause the belts to seporate. I want to stay with a 91 load or better.
Thats the problem. All the tires I like have lower load ratings.

Chris:
I can strongly recommend the Yokohama AVS dB ultra high performance all season tires for your car - they are $67 each at Tire Rack. I have always used Michelin Pilot XGT V4 tires on my MBs, but tried these Yokos on my 98 C230 based on the advice of my local tire guy, and the surveys at Tire Rack. They give away nothing at all in comparison to the Michelins in wet/dry handling as far as I could tell, and also according to the surveys on Tire Rack. Also, they are a much more comfortable ride, and a lot more quiet than the Michelins (not to mention a lot less money). They have a rating of 90V, and the specs/description is at

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/yokohama/yo_avs_db.jsp

These are going to be the next tires for my 300E as well.

__________________
John

2003 Firemist Red/grey leather SL 500
2015 Palladium Silver/black mbtex GLK 350
1987 Smoke Silver/burgundy mbtex 300E Sportline (SOLD)

Click to see 87 300E

How long have you been using them? I am worried about the lower load rating. By using the load rating of 90 instead of the 91 you lower the max load for the car by at least 100 pounds.
That is what i dont really want to do. Three dealers said I could use the 90 load tires if I really want but, there is a good chance the tires will not last or fail.
If you say you have been using these for a while with no problem then I may consider it. But to save money at first only to be forced to buy the more expensive tires after the cheaper ones fail because they are below the original standard for the car I will spend more money on a second set of tires.

Mine are 205/55VR 16" size, so they don't compare directly to the 205/60 VR15 on yours. However, I have been running the Michelin XGT V4 in your size on my 300E for 3 years, and they are also load rated at 90. I run them hard, (twisty mountain corners, 8 hour trips at 75-80mph during 95+ temps with 3 people and luggage for a week). They have not had any problems, and still have 60% tread. But Chiraq is right - if snow is important, drop some of the performance ability and go for a touring tire.

As I understand the load rating system, I would be real surprised by a failure of a 90 tire over a 91 during normal daily driving. That is 33 pounds/tire less carrying capacity for the 90 vs the 91.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/general/speed.htm

I interpret this to mean the 4 tires are rated to carry 'only' 5292 lbs instead of the 5424 lbs of the 91s. So after subtracting the vehicle weight, I am limited to about 2100 lbs of passengers and cargo. Therefore my son's 1000 lb adult ice hocky team starting lineup can put 1000 lbs of gear in the trunk and on a roof rack and still drive to Tucson at 75 mph this summer without exceeding the load rating. (I believe the speed rating and UTQC number also should be considered).

I am not convinced that you would see any difference between 90 and 91 for more typical daily use on these tires, but I am open to input from any of the tire experts on this forum. Maybe Luke at Tire Rack can give us some clarification.

__________________
John

2003 Firemist Red/grey leather SL 500
2015 Palladium Silver/black mbtex GLK 350
1987 Smoke Silver/burgundy mbtex 300E Sportline (SOLD)

Click to see 87 300E

John,

I know there is a very small difference between 90 and 91 and like I said only one out of three service advisors at the three closest MB dealers said he wouldnt do it.
I am an aggressive driver much of the time. I just dont want to go with the 90's and be the one out of 100 that ends up with shifting belts because of the small difference then be forced to spend even more to replace my new tires.

If I was to "go wild" and try the 90 ratings the
Dunlop SP Sport A2 or Dunlop Sport 5000 or the Turnza Revo H look good for all year use.

We are using the Yokohama AVS Db on my daughter's 420SEL (a far heavier car then a C230) with good results -- V-rated and very quiet, with good wet weather performance. The 420 uses a 215/65/15.

I do think (having lived in NYC with an upstate country house) that getting dedicated winter tires (even in a northern locale where they know how to sand and salt) in a good investment over trying to go wityh all-season tires.

__________________
'98 C43 AMG
'88 420SEL
'93 190E Limited Edition (including factory Sportline package)

They may be fine on your SEL but they may also be what the factory recomends as far as size and load. I coulndt find the specs for a 1988 SEL.
I assume putting on tires that are rated as 90 instead of 91 will be ok. I just wanted to see if anyone had with bad luck.
Or Ill just go with the Energy tires.

Well about the Load ratings, you must be careful not to get too hung up on them. Most load ratings are cut off numbers (ie...if you make 90 (1323 lbs) versus 91 (1356 lbs) that each tire is rated at. Now most tires in that size very greatly on sidewall thickness and width and so forth. Many cars in that range take 195/65/15s as stock, and go 205/60/15 for a little wider more performance oriented crew. Same thing happens on 16s, either 205/55/16 or 225/50/16. When changing tires sizes really matters is when you go down 3 or 4 load rating when plus sizing (i.e. find reinforced tires.) Michelin awhile back started reinforcing alot of their tires, increasing the load rating on their tires.

Now many of these tires probably have a load rating of about 1350, but since it doesn't meet 1356, it must be rated at 90 even though its 6 lbs short of 1356, which is 91's cut off. See the point?

Another thing, most of these max load ratings are taken with tires inflated to max. Most of us will never drive at 44psi or 52psi of air in our tires. When you get down to 30-35 one load rating difference is somewhat minimal. Also, another thing, is you can take a tire with lower load rating and add more air to compensate for the lower load rating. I know when going from 205/55/15 for a 190E sportline to 205/50/16s on a plus 1, Michelin recommends you inflate instead of 29 to 32 or something to make up for tires that don't carry the proper load rating.

In all if you are staying in the same size, it really shouldn't matter that much. If your performance oriented, most tires are more aggresive and give up a little on that load rating. And honestly is about 33lbs a difference. At MAX LOAD, for your car to blow a tire due to 33lbs of difference is not going to matter. Going down to something 100lbs less will (ie 87 load) because at normal psi it means alot more.

Hope this helps you make a good informed decision. (even go to mercedes vehicles that came with contis on 16s stock, you'll see 205/55/16 on the sports have a different rating then the 15s in 195/65/15 on the same car, just different wheels....engineers set standards and guidelines but sometimes, they aren't perfect in judging things. UTOG treadwear is another good example. they try, but most manufactuers do their testing to tell you the UTOG, one company might embelish a little more then another....you never know.

Take care...good luck.

__________________
Chirag (Charlie) Patel
--------------------------------------------
- 03 Mercedes S600 Sport TTV12
- 97 Acura NSX-T
- 99 BMW E36 M3 w/500+ HP
- 04 Lexus RX330
- 04 Dodge Dakota Quad 4x4 V8

4 Sale:
- 99 BMW M3 E36 Coup with Dinan SC, Upgraded to an RMS Stage 3 with Aftercooler, 12psi, and 500+hp @ flywheel.