Tire replacement for Lease Return

[pobi]

Hi all, I took over a lease of B250e today (US). there is one year left on the lease but front tires have to be replaced (completely bold). A few Qs; is there any approved list of tires for MB to avoid trouble at the end of the lease? Also from what I read it seems that it is ok not to have all 4 tires match exactly; only tires on the same axel need to match. This means that I can only change the front ones. Any though on this? thx

 

[Joe]

My lease ends this Dec, so I just got the MB "Lease-End Guide".
In it, it states the following will result in excess wear and use charges:
-tires with less than 1/8" tread depth.
-tires that are mismatched: tires on each axle that are not the same size, brand, model, type and/or speed rating, and equivalent in quality and performance to the original tires.

So, it seems like it would be okay as long as the front pair matches.

Additionally, my car did not have spare tire, so the original tires were run-flats. I'm assuming run-flat is an important aspect of "equivalent in quality and performance", so you probably should get run-flats.

 

[SheEV]

my husband always reminded me to pick the same tires brand, etc. spend the money now instead of being dinged in the end. My front tires were also bald after 20K.

 

[wtzouris]

I am selling a set of OEM wheels and winter tires - Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2 RunFlat, , the best . Not sure where you live. You can see the tires on eBay but of course message me directly for the best deal. William - Nine one seven eight five nine four seven six two is my cell number

 

[pathiel]

I just had my lease-end inspection completed (Friday, 6 Oct 2017).

I chatted with the guy who did the inspection about what to do about the tires. (The pair presently on the rear had worn very quickly when they had been on the front, such that both rear tires were about 2/32" tread remaining, while the front were both at 6/32".)

He said that this condition would be clearly captured in his report and that someone else would make the ultimate decision about whether or not I would be responsible for any remediation. He said he'd been doing this for many years and had heard from many people that things didn't always go as expected, such that he STRONGLY advised against doing ANYTHING about it until I got the final report.

I got the final report the next day. While it accurately & clearly indicated the condition of each tire, it ultimately concluded that the condition did not represent EXCESS wear and tear, such that I would not be responsible for any expense associated with this condition.

Note: 45,000 mile lease (with 43,000 miles on the car) and this was already it's second set of tires.

There was an "asterisk" note on the report indicating that tire wear was something that might be revisited if wear was too far below 1/8" when the car was ultimately returned. I spoke with the MBFS folks at the dealership about this, before returning the car, because the way the note was worded made no sense in the context of my car's documented condition (i.e., already worn below 1/8"). They indicated that, in general, no one from MBFS ever looks at the tires again because their condition can be readily inspected by buyer at the time of auction (such that there is no "hidden" liability).

I returned the car to the MB dealership a few days later (Monday, 9 Oct 2017). The same MBFS guy completed the transaction. Other that checking/recording the odometer, nothing was said about the condition of the vehicle.

I'll update this if anything changes on the subject.