Tavares was right when he called out this kind of behaviour. Other OEMs have put in the work knowing they'd face fines. If Mercedes can't keep up, that's too bad. Make the formula work. Changing the regulations just lets lazy OEMs off the hook and punishes OEMs which were proactive.
People are gonna hate you because it’s Reddit but I genuinely wonder how much of an impact the emissions from performance v8 cars are having on the environment to necessitate the axe they’re getting
Absolutely zero. But ask the average person on the street what is causing pollution and a fair chunk will say big sports cars, it’s wayyyy easier to regulate the individual from nice things and appear to be making an impact than it actually is to clamp down on large corporations and overseas firms/governments who are actually responsible. If governments appear to be doing impactful things they get the goodwill and votes as if they actually are doing impactful things.
Fleet average absolutely discriminates against sports cars to the point Aston Martin had to release a rebadged Toyota Aygo to bring their average down.
It’s why Mercedes is putting shitty 4 bangers in the C63 and keeping V8’s in only the most expensive models.
Mercedes is putting shitty four-bangers in the C63 for the same reason Toyota is putting hybrid systems in the Corolla. That's not discrimination, all cars are affected equally. It's literally a fleet average.
So it does discriminate against sports cars then? The idea is to offset the very few sports cars sold by pumping out a billion smaller cars instead? Obviously ignoring all the negative externalities that brings.
Like I said, making regulations to target the manufacture of sports cars is a visible action that doesn’t even make a dent in carbon emissions, but it looks like it does to your average joe.
Meanwhile China are busy pumping out more carbon than the rest of the world combined and our governments can’t be arsed to do anything about it because pushing back against the bad players in the world is difficult, and your average Joe doesn’t care, so no votes gained.
Oh that’s perfect then, the ice caps melt adjusted to a per capita rate. Thankfully if we just breed a gazillion serfs we can lower the per capita pollution to such a low point that we reverse global warming entirely.
The whole original point of this comment thread is sportscars contribute absolutely zero to global emissions. Scrap every single last car with over 300hp on the planet and I doubt you’d offset the output of one factory complex in China.
And my above comment is a direct response to your comment about how concerned you are about the emissions. When are you scrapping your 911 and Corvette to put your money where your mouth is?
I don’t give a shit about emissions, I do care about hypocrisy. The idea that per capita somehow makes Chinas disregard for polluting fine yet over here in the west we’re somehow responsible for cutting every enjoyment in life for the sake of the planet.
For every one of me there’s a thousand wet wipes driving around in Civics like you to offset my emissions, my conscience is clear, thanks.
Hold up, I’ve just seen your profile, I’m sorry but I don’t see you as a serious person 😂 600k karma and in love with Chinese EV’s, if Reddit could walk and walk 😂
We’re gonna run around in circles here so good luck with your bing chilling death traps.
There’s no cope, I see your agenda, I’m just gonna run around in circles with the most stereotypical Reddit neckbeard I’ve come across so far. I’m not gonna change your mind am I? Im talking to a bot. And I’m gonna stop right now.
The total emissions from performance cars are fairly minimal, but they’re also really easy to cut. Most people will be 90% as happy with a fast turbo-hybrid car as they are with a V8, whilst producing half the emissions. From a societal standpoint, that’s a pretty easy way to reduce a small amount of emissions, with minimal impact on our quality of life
The new C63 AMG was a fast turbo hybrid car, and I would say that it didn't keep anywhere close to 90% of the previous version's customers. You can't take a NA V8 and swap it out for a turbo 4cyl hybrid and charge the same money or more and expect everyone to just get on board.
Most car enthusiasts will feel that way despite knowing ICE emissions are a bad thing. But from a broader perspective, there are consequences of hydrocarbon combustion that make it arguably an irresponsible choice for basic road use.
Take an activity you probably don't care about. Do you think there should be tighter regulations on the overproduction of clothing and its associated emissions by the fashion industry? If so, do you care that fashionistas will object? What's the fundamental difference between that and being a car enthusiast?
Do you acknowledge that without sweeping regulations we'd still have lead in paint, asbestos in homes, ozone-destroying CFCs, more pollution in water sources, unsafe food products, and we'd have hunted many animals to extinction?
Good point, but sports cars are already so rare they have a very marginal impact in the grand scheme of things
Regular people will happily buy a car with a smaller engine because it gets better mpg and is probably cheaper - sports cars don’t touch every single human being like the fashion analogy does
You can’t even get a v8 sports car under 50k anymore
All the V8s on Earth probably spew 1% of pollution over their entire servicd lifes as a shipping container hauling Amazon shit from China spews in 5 minutes on the open ocean.
While technically true, that’s litres/km, and long haul flights are 5-7,000 miles. One return trip for one person is roughly equal to an entire average year of commuting by car. And that’s for one seat. What about a family of four? Now you’ve just generated CO2 equal to four years of average auto commuting in a single trip.
People get very sanctimonious about how combustion cars are absolutely killing the planet and everyone needs to jump on bikes or drove EVs... and then they jump on a flight from Australia to North America/Europe for their annual holiday. A return flight between Sydney and Charles de Gaulle Airport is 33,882km. A return flight between Sydney and LAX is 24,100km.
And that's assuming you don't fly anywhere domestically while you're in Europe/North America.
Even if you're travelling solo, that's almost certainly way more emissions than the average 911 throws out of its exhaust each year. And that's assuming the aircraft is completely occupied, and as you've pointed out, that you're not travelling in a group.
However, try curtailing discretionary international travel and a lot of the folks who are screaming at Governments to pass increasingly stringent emissions regulations on cars will suddenly find excuses as to why that shouldn't be done. Because it's not so nice when your own hobby/interest is the one being banned in the name of the planet.
Those ships are kind of over stated. They put out ridiculous amounts of sulphur emissions, which actually have the opposite effect of a lot of pollution, and helps cool the planet. Those ships moving to cleaner fuel actually accelerates global warming a bit.
After Engergy sector, transportation is the second biggest contributor to greenhouse gases worldwide. Half of that is caused by cars&vans.
I get it, those regulations are taking something very dear to us away. But saying this is 'feel good regulation' and cars aren't big producers is just delusional.
I can't find am exact definition of what they mean with vans, but since medium and heavy duty road vehicles are separately tracked, I would guess it's delivery vans with weight up to 3.5t
Most countries have records of how many vehicles are on the roads, roughly how many miles the average person travels.
Also, most countries know roughly how much fuel is being sold for personal use per year, and converting fuel burnt to CO2 is a pretty easy calculation.
When I brought this up, someone on here argued that disallowing low sales volume large cylinder count NA engines was so that rich people had to suffer through driving crappy turbo 4 cars like everyone else, not for any pressing environmental reason.
Emissions fines are fleet-based. If they weren't big contributors OEMs could just keep making them. Both you and u/swimming_cold are on entirely the wrong track here.
Im aware that they go off fleet averages, but what I’m unsure about how they’re calculated. For example, is it based off how many cars with a v8 were sold in a given year, or just how many different models were offered with a v8?
Right, because hypothetically a v8 could have better emissions than a 2.0l NA.
Sure, and also non-hypothetically, some OEMs might choose to produce hybrids instead of EVs to reach the same emissions target. It doesn't matter what you produce — it only matters that you reach the target as a whole fleet.
But if MB offers a v8, and only 18 people bought them, the fine MB pays should be adjusted accordingly
So we're super clear: Mercedes-Benz pays no fines in Europe for offering a V8 as long as their fleet emissions average is below the target. Europe just keeps lowering the average until 2035 or so.
Even after 2035, Mercedes has already secured the regulatory leeway to keep selling combustion vehicles in the EU as long as those vehicles run sustainable (synthetic) fuels. As the regulations are currently written, in other words, they can currently keep offering V8 options indefinitely.
In my perfect world, Mercedes can offer a v8 in every single model, and only be fined based on the number of units sold - not the entire fleet average
That's literally what already happens. It is aggregated out. If you sell fewer high-emissions units your fine will be less. If you sell more... then more. You're not thinking through the math here properly.
Fleet averages irrespective of sales mean that only a select few vehicles will get the big engine, likely the SUVs/trucks since those move waaay more units than enthusiasts cars do
Only a select few vehicles get the big engine because R&D costs money and individual unit sales must still be amortized. The tariffs being fleet-averaged have nothing to do with it.
Fundamentally, yes. The details differ but EPA CAFE is non-discriminatory, OEMs only need to stay within the target average. Mercedes can offer as many V8s as they like and can sell as many V8s as they like as long as their fleet-average matches the requirements.
It's based off how many cars are sold with each engine, and each emissions level of each of those cars.
It's literally on a car by car basis, based on massive databases of all of the vehicles a manufacturer sold in a year.
You have a target, based on plugging the average mass of a car (in most of the world) into an equation, or on the average footprint (wheelbase x track) in the US, Canada, and a couple of others (mainly done to protect the pickup truck Industry).
For every vehicle sold above the target, you essentially need to sell one that's the same level below the target.
Example based on the new 2025 EU regulation, using some made up figures - let's say Mercedes Benz sell 800,000 cars in the EU. They have an average mass of 1900kg.
A G63 makes 338 g/km, 248g/km over target. Mercedes need to sell 3 EVs at 0 g/km to offset this single SUV.
If MB can't balance the books, they get fined €95 per gramme per car at the end of the year. I.e., if their average for their 800k cars ended up being 100 g/km, they'd miss by 10.6 g/km, so would be fined 10.680000095 = €805 Mn. And that's just for 2025, they'd be assessed again in 26, 27, etc
These rules have been in place in Europe for about 15 years. They get harder every 5 years. 2025 is the first year of the latest target crunch, which was defined a few years back when the future of EV sales was looking rosier than it does right now.
So the head of MB is last minute calling for the fines to be dropped; they would have had plans in place to pass these rules, but those plans would have involved a lot more EQs than they're actually selling.
(Worth noting, rules like this apply in most of the high volume markets on earth - EU, US, China, UK, Canada, Mexico, India, Brazil, Switzerland, even Saudi Arabia have some form of rule like this!)
There are many things that contribute very little to CO2 emissions, but all of those little things add up to the catastrophic results of climate change. What makes your V8 more special than all of the other little things are also getting banned?
The regulations weren't made to specifically ban V8s. They were made to reduce emissions overall and auto manufacturers decided to axe V8s to achieve that.
Automobile emissions are a gigantic factor to global warming, and eliminating is an unironic matter of human survival.
A 2013 Ford Focus with the 1L ecoboost engine put out about that level. I'm not an expert on anything, but I don't think a 2013 Ford Focus with an ecoboost engine should be that high of a target, especially when you consider how all the high end sports cars are turning into hybrids.
You don't need a 1.0L engine to get good emissions. That was just to point out that Ford, in particular, has the technology and experience to meet that goal.
The 2025 Bentley Flying Spur makes 782 PS (771 HP), has a 4.0L V8, and puts out 33g/km of CO2. If Ford wanted to, they would make something with similar numbers, Bentley is proving that those numbers aren't impossible to meet. Ford would rather lose high-performance sales in Europe than develop vehicles to meet the standards, which is a legitimate business strategy at times.
Fords are not Bentley's, it's kind of a moot comparison . I guarantee you there's a lot of money and tech going into a V8 with 33g/km of emissions.
Still though, I would rather that Ford gives the consumer the option to pay extra for a "clean V8" if it comes down to that. But if nobody buys it, they've just lost all this money developing a clean system.
Why? Even if it only reduces overall emissions by a small amount, that’s better than nothing imo. Plus it almost feels hard to care about new V8 cars because they’re just so freaking expensive. It’s only a market for legitimately rich people anyways
It’s a predictable form of brinksmanship, tho. I’m sure every automaker’s Board has a decision logged with respect to the new regs and what their strategy is (meet the regs on time, assume delays, lobby for delays, play the brinksmanship game, a mix, etc.).
Stellantis is being punished right now for trying to meet the deadline on time while the market lags and they don’t have the right product mix. The smart move today looks to be assuming the deadlines would push out so that laziness ends up being efficient/cost effective.
At launch the rear wheel steer calibration was hot garbage, the suspension crashed, the infotainment was slow, the build quality was lacking, and they were extremely expensive for what they offered.
It is only worth it if you want the absolute most range and absolute least road noise. Or if you live in the state of california and want to spend 2.5k/mo and drive under 60 for the l3 package. Turns out not many people care for that.
Eh, this hasn't been my experience. I'm not sure where you are getting your deluge of data, sure one or two might be lacking, but no more than any other model.
Have rode in quite a few new Mercedes models, EQE and EQC also. I find that they are very well made and no “creaking” whatsoever. Apart from a GLB 200d that I used in france, that was pretty poverty-specced for the price…
Tell me a single vehicle that launched without defects and hadn't received a small update after a year...
2.5k/mo and drive under 60 for the l3 package.
What is an L3 package?
The eqe 350+ is fairly cheap here, and the tax benefits are huge. Can't see how it would cost 2.5k/month, a friend is renting one for ~900€/month, not including the tax reliefs.
Driving slowly in the city is the main advantage of EVs, I don't see how that's a bad thing. If you mostly do city driving, and do a longer trip once in a while, it's perfectly acceptable.
Personally, I'm not a huge fan of the EV stuff, but that doesn't make them bad cars.
Will concur with that. BMWs seem to be absolutely riddled with launch and ongoing recall notices, Mercedes have quite a lot as well. And a launch unit will always have the cake on this. At least they are constantly looking to improve their fleet and continually push out upgrades to get fixed on any minor issues their engineers discover, unlike a lot of other OEMs that often wait out major recalls until it’s either a major life/death defect or it may cause absolutely massive disrepute for the company. To many allow bad things to keep festering and pass it off as just “part of the ownership experience”.
Tell me a single vehicle that launched without defects
The EQS/EQE weren't defective, they worked fine, they were just bad cars lol. The BMW i-series cars & taycan were significantly better cars at launch.
hadn't received a small update after a year...
They haven't updated it much at all, quite the opposite, mercedes themselves have practically written off the EQ range and are set to replace it with an electric s-class & e-class with more traditional looks. https://www.motor1.com/news/731870/electric-mercedes-s-class-replace-eqs/. You can see this strategy in the G580 EQ which is just a g-class-but-electric.
What is an L3 package?
Their drive pilot package which lets you use proper hands-free self driving where you don't have to pay attention, except it costs 2.5k/yr, works on very limited roadways in the state of california, only under perfect conditions, under 60mph.
The eqe 350+ is fairly cheap here, and the tax benefits are huge. Can't see how it would cost 2.5k/month, a friend is renting one for ~900€/month
As I said, it would be good in a vacuum. Bu the i4/i5/ix, lucid, macan, taycan, lyriq, etc. all exist, and you can find great leases for all of those too.
The BMW i-series cars & taycan were significantly better cars at launch.
The I series also had it's problems at launch, and have awful range (which is something that the eq mercedes excel at).
I know someone that had a lot of problems on their new iX3 when they got it in 2022. I put it down to being a covid car.
They haven't updated it much at all
I'm not talking about a facelift. I'm talking about fixing stuff and having better quality control. Current models don't suffer from those problems.
As far as looks and interior, they are up to date with the other mercedes cars.
As I said, it would be good in a vacuum. Bu the i4/i5/ix, lucid, macan, taycan, lyriq, etc. all exist, and you can find great leases for all of those too.
The lucid and lyric don't exist here.
The Porsche doesn't qualify for tax reliefs, nobody is buying them to save money.
The bmw models are more expensive, the i5 is almost 10k more than the EQE, the iX is 3000€ more than the EQE SUV.
The chinese stuff is a bit crap, tesla is a bit crap, and people are starting to avoid them because of politics. Plus, once the tarifs on Chinese built EVs start to take place, they're not worth it. There are literal boat loads of chinese EVs sitting at the port of antwerp, they are not selling.
The i4 is the only exception, and I see a lot of them for that reason. Great value, great looks, not that much power and range, but just enough.
mercedes themselves have practically written off the EQ range
Here's a point where I can agree with you 100%. The new CLA ev thing is going to be incredibly popular, they are not going to sell any EQ car after they release that.
and have awful range (which is something that the eq mercedes excel at).
Frankly most don't care, and those that do buy the lucid instead.
nobody is buying
You can say whatever you want but the sales figures and Mercedes PR speaks for itself. Again, they are the ones changing their strategy, admitting fault, moving back to more traditional looking cars. They are the ones admitting their customers don't need the utmost range and all these gimmicks.
The bmw models are more expensive
Not when you are comparing leases, and nobody is paying cash for these cars. Again, sales figures speak for themselves. BMW sold 50,981 electric cars in the states, their strategy works and mercedes is shifting towards that.
The chinese stuff is a bit crap, tesla is a bit crap, and people are starting to avoid them because of politics
Guess what, even the model s and x, despite not having been refreshed in years, still outsold the EQE and EQS ....
Say whatever you want. Mercedes disagrees with you, the sales numbers disagree with you, your personal experience doesn't change that.
The EQE was the worst car I drove last year. The steering was vague, the handling was ponderous, the acceleration was ICE-like in most cases, the brake pedal throw was looong and there was precious little regen to make up for it (though I can just about accept that being a deliberate decision), and the suspension wasn't very supple - which is the one single thing a Mercedes should excel at if it's going to fail elsewhere.
The L3 drivers assist package. You know, the one nobody buys because it costs more than Tesla FSD despite being usable in essentially 0% of routine driving situations.
At launch the rear wheel steer calibration was hot garbage, the suspension crashed, the infotainment was slow, the QC was lacking, their weird regen brake pedal was awful if not dangerous
I have heard complaints about all of these issues from the reviews that I've seen (slow infotainment computer, weird brake pedal that gets away from you, worse suspension and insulation than the ICE S-class, bonked rear steer, etc). You specified "at launch." Has it improved now?
I'm specifically asking because some of the early 2022 EQS and 2023 EQS examples are dipping into the low $40k range. For vehicles that retailed $80-120k at launch, that is a very tempting choice right in line with a ~2021 Model S or ~2021 Taycan.
Did they do OTA updates or recalls/TSBs to fix the rear steer, pedal feel, etc, or did they just fix it in the subsequent years? Any information would be appreciated.
They did OTA to fix some of the feel problems, it’s not quite as crashy now, steer is much smoother, but it’s still not as good as the iX or the lucid imho.
Sounds good. I'm waiting for a month or two before purchasing, so hopefully all the cars coming off lease will tank the market even further. I definitely test drive and cross shop all the competitors (EQS, Taycan, Model S, Lucid Air, etc). Thanks!
It sounds like shill and propaganda, but when you read about the size of a Lucid Air being a 5/E competitor but has the interior volume of a 7/S, you know they have solid engineering to back up the products.
The EQS in comparison is an embarrassment. It's closer to the S class in size but has passenger space closer to an E class. It's a ground up EV that has no frunk but still an incredibly high hood line. The hatchback is one of its last saving graces. "Engineered like no other," my ass. Not the case since the W140.
I've said this elsewhere. In my country, the EQ mercedes are the cheapest non Chinese option in every segment. The i5 is 9k more, with less range while also looking dreadful.
Loads of range, great interiors and features, not so good looks. And an actual autonomous driving system with certifications and sensors that won't steer your car into oncoming traffic and skip stop signs.
And, in terms of build quality, it's leagues above Tesla and the Chinese stuff.
I've actually seen a red one with white interiors that actually looked decent, but it was an "AMG" model.
This sub is far more positive about EV’s than it is negative about them. I lurk in virtually every single thread that gets any traction and in threads where EV’s are brought up the positive comments get way more traction.
As someone who's a die hard G wagon and 4x4 fan, I can't like it. That battery between the axles kills the break over angle, and we all know that EVs can't do off roading, their range is awful.
The change from solid front axle to IFS was already a stab in the heart, but this EV G wagon just kills me.
I don't like it, I don't understand it, and I hope that governments introduce a tax on vehicles that consume too much electricity.
From experience in my Wrangler, that is not the case. Even with my tiny battery I can crawl around for hours in 4lo. A dedicated BEV with a big battery and a more efficient powertrain should be just fine.
I'm the complete opposite, I absolutely love the idea and have one reserved at the dealer.
and we all know that EVs can't do off roading, their range is awful.
Why would you say so? Quite the opposite - the range goes exponentially downhill at higher speeds due to air resistance, at low speeds its ample, and in theory the torque & torque vectoring of a 4-motor setup is better than anything off-road.
and I hope that governments introduce a tax on vehicles that consume too much electricity.
I'm not sure of your point here either, especially if you get your energy from nuclear or renewable sources, it is significantly better than the i6 or v8 g-wagons for the enviornemnt.
Not that I am buying one to be enviornmentally friendly, I am not, but its not a viable arguement against the car, unless you'd like to ban the ICE g-wagons as well.
Nothing beats locking diffs off road. 4 wheels spinning at the same rate, locked between each other mechanically.
Instant torque is not good off road. It works on road, but when you throw in adverse conditions, EVs just put down way too much power, or not enough. And once you change the tyres, you can throw all that control away.
Even ABS and stability control is an absolute pain in modern off roaders.
EVs have low off road range, battery degradation is higher when off road, and you can't refuel them instantly and anywhere. It will probably be fine on your local off road park, but that's it. You don't get in an EV and go halfway across the world.
Those are not opinions, they are facts.
And all of those things are not even the biggest issue with EVs off road. Weight.
The fact is that the g580 is a city vehicle. And a city vehicle doesn't need to be a G wagon.
Nothing beats locking diffs off road. 4 wheels spinning at the same rate, locked between each other mechanically.
How is this better than a motor for each wheel, spinning at the same rate?
Instant torque is not good off road
Quite the opposite, why would you have a low-range gearbox if you want less torque?
EVs just put down way too much power, or not enough. And once you change the tyres, you can throw all that control away.
Could you explain why? I'm not sure I follow.
Even ABS and stability control is an absolute pain in modern off roaders.
Quite the opposite, hill descent, crawl control, all forms of stability control. Traditional safety-oriented road ABS and ESC are detrimental off-road, yes, but the g580 allows you to disable that altogether.
EVs have low off road range, battery degradation is higher when off road
Please cite where you got this info from? EV range is a function of aero/drag first and foremost, which exponentially increases with speed. The slower the activity, the more range you have. Battery degradation is a nonissue, ev batteries will last 10-15 years minimum, and can be refurbished and/or replaced at that point.
Those are not opinions, they are facts.
Incorrect facts. Your opinions on EVs are significantly misinformed and I suggest you read up a little more.
Weight.
its a g-wagon its already 6000 lbs in g63 ICE form lmao
The fact is that the g580 is a city vehicle. And a city vehicle doesn't need to be a G wagon.
Contrary to your previous statement, these are opinions.
No, they really are not. Their technology is laughable, the interior design is worse than a night club, they are poorly made (creaks and poor fitment), and they weigh more than they should (versus comparable EVs).
That's all on top of looking poor despite other better-looking cars have similar coefficients of drag.
They realised that most AMG owners only buy them to put annoyingly loud pipes on them to rev it in front of a kebab shop or shisha bar and the 4cyl just isn't obnoxious enough.
It's a fleet average, based on all of the cars sold in a market in a year. Moving a relatively high volume car from a V8 to a PHEV helps massively in that calculation.
I've done a really long reply to someone else - MB's fleet average target in Europe for this year is around 90 gCO2/km on the WLTP cycle.
If you're selling 20k V8 C classes that make 270g/km each, you need 40k EVs at 0 g/km to balance the books.
With the fine levels at €95/g, if you can't balance the books, each unbalanced V8 will cost you 180*95 = €17.1k / car in fines. Which is probably a big chunk of the margin on a €100k car.
Because they dont sell and starting this years the EU manufacturer average is based on the cars sold as well as just an average of the lineupe, and MB is heavy on the large luxury barges which are way beyond the Maximum average
The EU is absolutely going to have to do this if they want to keep their auto industry alive. The Germans simply cannot compete in the EV space against the American and Chinese startups.
It’s going to come down to a choice between tens of billions in economic activity and hundreds of thousands of jobs, or these targets.
My problem with the regulations is that they’re just opaque ever advancing ICE bans. Make ICE so difficult to engineer, expensive, and unreliable that they kill them without an outright ban. The burden should be on EV manufacturers to produce a product that naturally becomes a practical choice. It’s just a misguided savior complex
Yeesh. I hadn't heard about that. How is that? Just raising the inspection requirements for existing cars so high that no combustion car could actually pass?
How about people with lower incomes who own older vehicles, who are being told to go f@#k themselves and buy a new vehicle if they still want transportation? That seems like a pretty decent chunk of the voting bloc.
Not really, the inspection requirements are usually the same, essentially, the bans are done through a sticker system
Cars with no sticker are older than 2000/2006 for gasoline/diesel respectively.
Cars with B sticker are older than 06/14
Cars with C sticker are newer than 06/14
Currently, towns with >50k population (20k for catalonia, which they ""voluntarily"" chose to lower) have to ban them, consequences for not doing so (starting this year) will be removal of public transport aids among other things. Most of the so-called low emission zones that these comprise aren't just for city centers, they usually encompass the city + surrounding satellite towns.
The bans aren't technically full bans (those would be illegal), essentially, they are just banned from driving from most of the territory from early morning to late afternoon.
People don't want it. BMW expected that about 20% of the G70 7 series will be the i7, but the actual take rate is less than half of that if i remember correctly. Why would an electric S be any different than an electric 7?
People don't want it. BMW expected that about 20% of the G70 7 series will be the i7, but the actual take rate is less than half of that if i remember correctly.
About 1/3 of 7-Series sales are the i7, at least in the US. In 2024 they sold 10,714 7-Series, 3431 of which were i7's. 2023 had very similar numbers, you can see them if you download the Q4 BMW Group Sales Charts PDF at the bottom of the page.
So what I'm reading here is that the new rules are mostly going to fuck VW somewhere uncomfortable.
Oh and also Mercedes seems to be making an announcement that they are in dire need of new leadership. Bit strange for the old boss to be the one breaking that news.
EU regulations are something crazy, similar to CAFE laws but much more extreme. That's why the most common cars in EU are rapidly becoming 1L 3 cylinder mild-hybrid Suvs
In my country the majority of people for now doesn't want EVs because they cost way too much, but because of the CO2 taxes the manufacturers now give us only shitty 3 cylinder cars, many of them suvs, at very high prices compared to 5 years ago (when those taxes were first introduced). So we can't afford EVs but we are also becoming rapidly priced out of decent Ice cars (the cheapest vw golf is almost 1.5 times our average annual salary)
I'm from finland so we have had CO2 taxes on cars for decades. Upon registeration you also have to pay car tax that is calculated by the value, co2 and the weight of the car. EVs are excempt from this tax so it makes the price difference much lower.
Over here 30% of new cars are EVs and 20% are PHEVs so people are moving to them as the ICE options get fewer all the time. We can afford to buy slightly more expensive EVs because the running costs are fraction compared to petrol.
For example VW Tiguan and ID.4 are practically the same price, ID.3 and Golf only have difference of couple grands and for example Tesla Model 3 is significantly cheaper than competing BMWs and Mercs
We can afford to buy slightly more expensive EVs because the running costs are fraction compared to petrol.
Perhaps it has changed a bit, but here in Poland charging an EV at a public charger is a bit more expensive than refuelling a comparable EV. And if you could charge at home, breaking even would take 150-200k km.
Will someone think of the poor car companies? They were sitting on their ass while tesla and china were innovating and the government is now telling then to do something!
This is like asking the police to not arrest you if you break the law lol. "Hey could you make this regulation a toothless tiger for me please? thanks"
Sir you ask to do this BEFORE you shit the bed with an I4 hybrid c63SE. If you succeed, you’d be selling a successful new gen with a v8. Not being ridiculed for that POS bloated i4
Recoil42@reddit
Tavares was right when he called out this kind of behaviour. Other OEMs have put in the work knowing they'd face fines. If Mercedes can't keep up, that's too bad. Make the formula work. Changing the regulations just lets lazy OEMs off the hook and punishes OEMs which were proactive.
MilkyWaySamurai@reddit
Shouldn’t have had the regulations to begin with.
swimming_cold@reddit
People are gonna hate you because it’s Reddit but I genuinely wonder how much of an impact the emissions from performance v8 cars are having on the environment to necessitate the axe they’re getting
QuicksilverC5@reddit
Absolutely zero. But ask the average person on the street what is causing pollution and a fair chunk will say big sports cars, it’s wayyyy easier to regulate the individual from nice things and appear to be making an impact than it actually is to clamp down on large corporations and overseas firms/governments who are actually responsible. If governments appear to be doing impactful things they get the goodwill and votes as if they actually are doing impactful things.
RuleSouthern3609@reddit
Downvoted for telling the truth, I heavily doubt millions of people would drive their V8 Mercedes around…
Recoil42@reddit
European regulations are carbon-based and fleet-averaged, they don't discriminate against sports cars whatsoever.
QuicksilverC5@reddit
Fleet average absolutely discriminates against sports cars to the point Aston Martin had to release a rebadged Toyota Aygo to bring their average down.
It’s why Mercedes is putting shitty 4 bangers in the C63 and keeping V8’s in only the most expensive models.
Recoil42@reddit
Mercedes is putting shitty four-bangers in the C63 for the same reason Toyota is putting hybrid systems in the Corolla. That's not discrimination, all cars are affected equally. It's literally a fleet average.
QuicksilverC5@reddit
So it does discriminate against sports cars then? The idea is to offset the very few sports cars sold by pumping out a billion smaller cars instead? Obviously ignoring all the negative externalities that brings.
Like I said, making regulations to target the manufacture of sports cars is a visible action that doesn’t even make a dent in carbon emissions, but it looks like it does to your average joe.
Meanwhile China are busy pumping out more carbon than the rest of the world combined and our governments can’t be arsed to do anything about it because pushing back against the bad players in the world is difficult, and your average Joe doesn’t care, so no votes gained.
Oh_ffs_seriously@reddit
And they still make less CO2 per capita than the USA (but more than the EU).
QuicksilverC5@reddit
Oh that’s perfect then, the ice caps melt adjusted to a per capita rate. Thankfully if we just breed a gazillion serfs we can lower the per capita pollution to such a low point that we reverse global warming entirely.
Oh_ffs_seriously@reddit
So, when are you scrapping your 911 and Corvette?
QuicksilverC5@reddit
The whole original point of this comment thread is sportscars contribute absolutely zero to global emissions. Scrap every single last car with over 300hp on the planet and I doubt you’d offset the output of one factory complex in China.
Oh_ffs_seriously@reddit
And my above comment is a direct response to your comment about how concerned you are about the emissions. When are you scrapping your 911 and Corvette to put your money where your mouth is?
QuicksilverC5@reddit
I don’t give a shit about emissions, I do care about hypocrisy. The idea that per capita somehow makes Chinas disregard for polluting fine yet over here in the west we’re somehow responsible for cutting every enjoyment in life for the sake of the planet.
For every one of me there’s a thousand wet wipes driving around in Civics like you to offset my emissions, my conscience is clear, thanks.
Oh_ffs_seriously@reddit
Lower per capita emissions means that they are polluting less. It's a simple concept.
Recoil42@reddit
I literally just told you it doesn't.
QuicksilverC5@reddit
Hold up, I’ve just seen your profile, I’m sorry but I don’t see you as a serious person 😂 600k karma and in love with Chinese EV’s, if Reddit could walk and walk 😂
We’re gonna run around in circles here so good luck with your bing chilling death traps.
Recoil42@reddit
That's one hell of a cope response to a discussion on European emissions regulations.
QuicksilverC5@reddit
There’s no cope, I see your agenda, I’m just gonna run around in circles with the most stereotypical Reddit neckbeard I’ve come across so far. I’m not gonna change your mind am I? Im talking to a bot. And I’m gonna stop right now.
Recoil42@reddit
Ah yes, the nefarious agenda of relating EU regs on fleet emissions. You caught me.
nugeythefloozey@reddit
The total emissions from performance cars are fairly minimal, but they’re also really easy to cut. Most people will be 90% as happy with a fast turbo-hybrid car as they are with a V8, whilst producing half the emissions. From a societal standpoint, that’s a pretty easy way to reduce a small amount of emissions, with minimal impact on our quality of life
SuperShyChild@reddit
The new C63 AMG was a fast turbo hybrid car, and I would say that it didn't keep anywhere close to 90% of the previous version's customers. You can't take a NA V8 and swap it out for a turbo 4cyl hybrid and charge the same money or more and expect everyone to just get on board.
swimming_cold@reddit
I get what you’re saying but fuck that
Why don’t we cut down on private jets too while we’re at it
strongmanass@reddit
I personally support both cutting car and private jet emissions.
swimming_cold@reddit
I don’t. I like the emotion of big v8s. Fight me. Not saying your perspective is invalid
strongmanass@reddit
Most car enthusiasts will feel that way despite knowing ICE emissions are a bad thing. But from a broader perspective, there are consequences of hydrocarbon combustion that make it arguably an irresponsible choice for basic road use.
Take an activity you probably don't care about. Do you think there should be tighter regulations on the overproduction of clothing and its associated emissions by the fashion industry? If so, do you care that fashionistas will object? What's the fundamental difference between that and being a car enthusiast?
Middle_Luck_9412@reddit
No, I don't believe in very wide, sweeping regulations.
strongmanass@reddit
Do you acknowledge that without sweeping regulations we'd still have lead in paint, asbestos in homes, ozone-destroying CFCs, more pollution in water sources, unsafe food products, and we'd have hunted many animals to extinction?
kinda_guilty@reddit
But I want my vroom vroom! Fuck all that taking-care-of-the-commons nonsense. I will be dead in a few decades anyway!
swimming_cold@reddit
Good point, but sports cars are already so rare they have a very marginal impact in the grand scheme of things
Regular people will happily buy a car with a smaller engine because it gets better mpg and is probably cheaper - sports cars don’t touch every single human being like the fashion analogy does
You can’t even get a v8 sports car under 50k anymore
nugeythefloozey@reddit
I agree completely, they’re even worse than cars
PlsHalp420@reddit
Probably none; cars aren't the big producers here.
Most of this is feel good regulation at this point.
Bluecolt@reddit
All the V8s on Earth probably spew 1% of pollution over their entire servicd lifes as a shipping container hauling Amazon shit from China spews in 5 minutes on the open ocean.
PlsHalp420@reddit
Yep. I find this hilarious when greenies come around blaming our V8s when they take the airplane every year to cuba or whatever.
Have you seen how much fuel a plane uses?
How about those avocados you get from the other side of the world? Or those coffee grains?
Meanwhile, my 20+ year old car get maintained and doesn't need to spend the energy of manufacturing another.
AnonymousEngineer_@reddit
A fully laden long haul flight uses about the same fuel per passenger as a Toyota Prius.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_aircraft
Consider the fact that not all aircraft have all seats occupied and the relative distances travelled.
yetiflask@reddit
Environment doesn't give a fuck about per passenger.
WTF is that nonsense?
New-Connection-9088@reddit
While technically true, that’s litres/km, and long haul flights are 5-7,000 miles. One return trip for one person is roughly equal to an entire average year of commuting by car. And that’s for one seat. What about a family of four? Now you’ve just generated CO2 equal to four years of average auto commuting in a single trip.
AnonymousEngineer_@reddit
That's my entire point.
People get very sanctimonious about how combustion cars are absolutely killing the planet and everyone needs to jump on bikes or drove EVs... and then they jump on a flight from Australia to North America/Europe for their annual holiday. A return flight between Sydney and Charles de Gaulle Airport is 33,882km. A return flight between Sydney and LAX is 24,100km.
And that's assuming you don't fly anywhere domestically while you're in Europe/North America.
Even if you're travelling solo, that's almost certainly way more emissions than the average 911 throws out of its exhaust each year. And that's assuming the aircraft is completely occupied, and as you've pointed out, that you're not travelling in a group.
However, try curtailing discretionary international travel and a lot of the folks who are screaming at Governments to pass increasingly stringent emissions regulations on cars will suddenly find excuses as to why that shouldn't be done. Because it's not so nice when your own hobby/interest is the one being banned in the name of the planet.
itsamemarioscousin@reddit
That's a lot of whataboutisms in one post.
Drive what you want, but unless you're sticking with purely locally grown food and not flying, you're also doing all those other things too.
People have to the able to travel. The thing with an airplane is, it's usually the only option, while there are a lot of alternatives to a V8.
Takes about 8-15 tonnes of CO2 to make a new car (depending on where you read it).
A modern V8 makes about 300 g/km / 500 g/mile, so every 10000 miles makes about 5 tonnes CO2. An older car would be more.
A modern hybrid makes about a third as much CO2 per mile, so the pay off miles (z) can be calculated (assuming 12 tonnes manufacturing CO2) using
V8 emissions/mile times z = (hybrid emissions/mile times z) plus manufacturing emissions
0.0005 z = 0.000166 z + 12
0.000333 z = 12
Z = 36000 miles.
So for every 36000 miles you put on a V8 car, your emissions would be less if you replaced it with a new hybrid.
Drive what you want, it's your choice, but I wouldn't bother using any justification other than "because I want to".
Redbulldildo@reddit
Those ships are kind of over stated. They put out ridiculous amounts of sulphur emissions, which actually have the opposite effect of a lot of pollution, and helps cool the planet. Those ships moving to cleaner fuel actually accelerates global warming a bit.
B_tC@reddit
What?
After Engergy sector, transportation is the second biggest contributor to greenhouse gases worldwide. Half of that is caused by cars&vans.
I get it, those regulations are taking something very dear to us away. But saying this is 'feel good regulation' and cars aren't big producers is just delusional.
PlsHalp420@reddit
As you said, transportation.
Planes, trains, boats, semi trucks.
I'm sure my v8 that does 25mpg is the main source of global warming. /s
B_tC@reddit
As I said, cars and vans make up approx 50% of that sector.
And your v8 happens to be a car, too.
PlsHalp420@reddit
Sorry I misread that part.
What are vans? Are semis vans?
B_tC@reddit
https://www.statista.com/chart/30890/estimated-share-of-co2-emissions-in-the-transportation-sector/
I can't find am exact definition of what they mean with vans, but since medium and heavy duty road vehicles are separately tracked, I would guess it's delivery vans with weight up to 3.5t
PlsHalp420@reddit
Ok, so light vehicles. Semis are in the heavy category.
I wonder how they get this data.
itsamemarioscousin@reddit
Most countries have records of how many vehicles are on the roads, roughly how many miles the average person travels.
Also, most countries know roughly how much fuel is being sold for personal use per year, and converting fuel burnt to CO2 is a pretty easy calculation.
MrPterodactyl@reddit
When I brought this up, someone on here argued that disallowing low sales volume large cylinder count NA engines was so that rich people had to suffer through driving crappy turbo 4 cars like everyone else, not for any pressing environmental reason.
Recoil42@reddit
Emissions fines are fleet-based. If they weren't big contributors OEMs could just keep making them. Both you and u/swimming_cold are on entirely the wrong track here.
swimming_cold@reddit
Im aware that they go off fleet averages, but what I’m unsure about how they’re calculated. For example, is it based off how many cars with a v8 were sold in a given year, or just how many different models were offered with a v8?
Recoil42@reddit
It's based off your total emissions.
There's no quota for the number of cylinders or displacement.
swimming_cold@reddit
Right, because hypothetically a v8 could have better emissions than a 2.0l NA.
But if MB offers a v8, and only 18 people bought them, the fine MB pays should be adjusted accordingly
Recoil42@reddit
Sure, and also non-hypothetically, some OEMs might choose to produce hybrids instead of EVs to reach the same emissions target. It doesn't matter what you produce — it only matters that you reach the target as a whole fleet.
So we're super clear: Mercedes-Benz pays no fines in Europe for offering a V8 as long as their fleet emissions average is below the target. Europe just keeps lowering the average until 2035 or so.
Even after 2035, Mercedes has already secured the regulatory leeway to keep selling combustion vehicles in the EU as long as those vehicles run sustainable (synthetic) fuels. As the regulations are currently written, in other words, they can currently keep offering V8 options indefinitely.
swimming_cold@reddit
I think we’re sort of missing each other here
In my perfect world, Mercedes can offer a v8 in every single model, and only be fined based on the number of units sold - not the entire fleet average
Recoil42@reddit
That's literally what already happens. It is aggregated out. If you sell fewer high-emissions units your fine will be less. If you sell more... then more. You're not thinking through the math here properly.
Only a select few vehicles get the big engine because R&D costs money and individual unit sales must still be amortized. The tariffs being fleet-averaged have nothing to do with it.
swimming_cold@reddit
Ahh ok, I can vibe with that
Does this apply in both the EU and USA?
Recoil42@reddit
Fundamentally, yes. The details differ but EPA CAFE is non-discriminatory, OEMs only need to stay within the target average. Mercedes can offer as many V8s as they like and can sell as many V8s as they like as long as their fleet-average matches the requirements.
itsamemarioscousin@reddit
It's based off how many cars are sold with each engine, and each emissions level of each of those cars.
It's literally on a car by car basis, based on massive databases of all of the vehicles a manufacturer sold in a year.
You have a target, based on plugging the average mass of a car (in most of the world) into an equation, or on the average footprint (wheelbase x track) in the US, Canada, and a couple of others (mainly done to protect the pickup truck Industry).
For every vehicle sold above the target, you essentially need to sell one that's the same level below the target.
Example based on the new 2025 EU regulation, using some made up figures - let's say Mercedes Benz sell 800,000 cars in the EU. They have an average mass of 1900kg.
2025 Target = 93.6−(0.0144×(1900−1609.6)) = 89.4g/km on the WLTP test cycle. (formula source, Pg 38 of this doc
A G63 makes 338 g/km, 248g/km over target. Mercedes need to sell 3 EVs at 0 g/km to offset this single SUV.
If MB can't balance the books, they get fined €95 per gramme per car at the end of the year. I.e., if their average for their 800k cars ended up being 100 g/km, they'd miss by 10.6 g/km, so would be fined 10.680000095 = €805 Mn. And that's just for 2025, they'd be assessed again in 26, 27, etc
These rules have been in place in Europe for about 15 years. They get harder every 5 years. 2025 is the first year of the latest target crunch, which was defined a few years back when the future of EV sales was looking rosier than it does right now.
So the head of MB is last minute calling for the fines to be dropped; they would have had plans in place to pass these rules, but those plans would have involved a lot more EQs than they're actually selling.
(Worth noting, rules like this apply in most of the high volume markets on earth - EU, US, China, UK, Canada, Mexico, India, Brazil, Switzerland, even Saudi Arabia have some form of rule like this!)
MoboMogami@reddit
Now bring back two strokes
swimming_cold@reddit
It actually makes me sad but that probably means I’m a sad human
Few_Landscape1035@reddit
There are many things that contribute very little to CO2 emissions, but all of those little things add up to the catastrophic results of climate change. What makes your V8 more special than all of the other little things are also getting banned?
The regulations weren't made to specifically ban V8s. They were made to reduce emissions overall and auto manufacturers decided to axe V8s to achieve that.
Automobile emissions are a gigantic factor to global warming, and eliminating is an unironic matter of human survival.
swimming_cold@reddit
True, could you tell someone uninformed like me about some other industries/hobbies/areas which are being affected?
pm-me-racecars@reddit
In 2025, the standard in the EU is set to be 93.6 g of co2 per km.
https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/transport/road-transport-reducing-co2-emissions-vehicles/co2-emission-performance-standards-cars-and-vans_en
A 2013 Ford Focus with the 1L ecoboost engine put out about that level. I'm not an expert on anything, but I don't think a 2013 Ford Focus with an ecoboost engine should be that high of a target, especially when you consider how all the high end sports cars are turning into hybrids.
swimming_cold@reddit
Well that’s the point, we dont want a sports car with a 1.0L. Mercedes sales clearly demonstrate that
pm-me-racecars@reddit
You don't need a 1.0L engine to get good emissions. That was just to point out that Ford, in particular, has the technology and experience to meet that goal.
The 2025 Bentley Flying Spur makes 782 PS (771 HP), has a 4.0L V8, and puts out 33g/km of CO2. If Ford wanted to, they would make something with similar numbers, Bentley is proving that those numbers aren't impossible to meet. Ford would rather lose high-performance sales in Europe than develop vehicles to meet the standards, which is a legitimate business strategy at times.
AnonymousEngineer_@reddit
The issue is that Ford won't sell any Mustangs when the standard model costs as much as a Bentley Continental GT.
swimming_cold@reddit
Fords are not Bentley's, it's kind of a moot comparison . I guarantee you there's a lot of money and tech going into a V8 with 33g/km of emissions.
Still though, I would rather that Ford gives the consumer the option to pay extra for a "clean V8" if it comes down to that. But if nobody buys it, they've just lost all this money developing a clean system.
BTTWchungus@reddit
None
hermitcraftfan135@reddit
Why? Even if it only reduces overall emissions by a small amount, that’s better than nothing imo. Plus it almost feels hard to care about new V8 cars because they’re just so freaking expensive. It’s only a market for legitimately rich people anyways
MilkyWaySamurai@reddit
While EVs are so cheap you mean? Modern ICE cars are low enough on emissions that’s it’s not a problem.
Few_Landscape1035@reddit
Let me try to get this clear, you think emissions regulations and fines shouldn't exist?
MilkyWaySamurai@reddit
To a certain point, sure. But the current, and coming ones, are unnecessarily strict on purpose to push the EV agenda.
_galaga_@reddit
It’s a predictable form of brinksmanship, tho. I’m sure every automaker’s Board has a decision logged with respect to the new regs and what their strategy is (meet the regs on time, assume delays, lobby for delays, play the brinksmanship game, a mix, etc.).
Stellantis is being punished right now for trying to meet the deadline on time while the market lags and they don’t have the right product mix. The smart move today looks to be assuming the deadlines would push out so that laziness ends up being efficient/cost effective.
impossiblefork@reddit
What would the alternative be?
Some kind of mandatory maximum emission levels per car sold? That seems fine, but does he want that?
hi_im_bored13@reddit
Yeah if I was the company who made the godawful EQ cars I'd say the same.
RafaelSeco@reddit
Godawful looking*.
They are actually very good EVs.
hi_im_bored13@reddit
At launch the rear wheel steer calibration was hot garbage, the suspension crashed, the infotainment was slow, the build quality was lacking, and they were extremely expensive for what they offered.
It is only worth it if you want the absolute most range and absolute least road noise. Or if you live in the state of california and want to spend 2.5k/mo and drive under 60 for the l3 package. Turns out not many people care for that.
NotPumba420@reddit
Of which car? I got the world‘s first customer EQE and it had 0 issues. Absolutely great car except for design and plastic.
hi_im_bored13@reddit
Thats why I mentioned QC, some are perfect (and when it is perfect, apart from the glare, its a really nice interior)
but some creak and squeak everywhere, it's not exclusive to the EQ line, it's an issue with current MB in general.
NotsoNewtoGermany@reddit
Eh, this hasn't been my experience. I'm not sure where you are getting your deluge of data, sure one or two might be lacking, but no more than any other model.
hi_im_bored13@reddit
For modern mercedes, this doesn't mean much
NotsoNewtoGermany@reddit
This hasn't been my experience.
IsEndTheNear@reddit
That is interesting.
Have rode in quite a few new Mercedes models, EQE and EQC also. I find that they are very well made and no “creaking” whatsoever. Apart from a GLB 200d that I used in france, that was pretty poverty-specced for the price…
RafaelSeco@reddit
Tell me a single vehicle that launched without defects and hadn't received a small update after a year...
What is an L3 package?
The eqe 350+ is fairly cheap here, and the tax benefits are huge. Can't see how it would cost 2.5k/month, a friend is renting one for ~900€/month, not including the tax reliefs.
Driving slowly in the city is the main advantage of EVs, I don't see how that's a bad thing. If you mostly do city driving, and do a longer trip once in a while, it's perfectly acceptable.
Personally, I'm not a huge fan of the EV stuff, but that doesn't make them bad cars.
knowledgeable_diablo@reddit
Will concur with that. BMWs seem to be absolutely riddled with launch and ongoing recall notices, Mercedes have quite a lot as well. And a launch unit will always have the cake on this. At least they are constantly looking to improve their fleet and continually push out upgrades to get fixed on any minor issues their engineers discover, unlike a lot of other OEMs that often wait out major recalls until it’s either a major life/death defect or it may cause absolutely massive disrepute for the company. To many allow bad things to keep festering and pass it off as just “part of the ownership experience”.
TheStrike9716@reddit
First question:
Pretty much every vehicle made before stuff was designed with computers.
hi_im_bored13@reddit
The EQS/EQE weren't defective, they worked fine, they were just bad cars lol. The BMW i-series cars & taycan were significantly better cars at launch.
They haven't updated it much at all, quite the opposite, mercedes themselves have practically written off the EQ range and are set to replace it with an electric s-class & e-class with more traditional looks. https://www.motor1.com/news/731870/electric-mercedes-s-class-replace-eqs/. You can see this strategy in the G580 EQ which is just a g-class-but-electric.
Their drive pilot package which lets you use proper hands-free self driving where you don't have to pay attention, except it costs 2.5k/yr, works on very limited roadways in the state of california, only under perfect conditions, under 60mph.
As I said, it would be good in a vacuum. Bu the i4/i5/ix, lucid, macan, taycan, lyriq, etc. all exist, and you can find great leases for all of those too.
RafaelSeco@reddit
The I series also had it's problems at launch, and have awful range (which is something that the eq mercedes excel at).
I know someone that had a lot of problems on their new iX3 when they got it in 2022. I put it down to being a covid car.
I'm not talking about a facelift. I'm talking about fixing stuff and having better quality control. Current models don't suffer from those problems.
As far as looks and interior, they are up to date with the other mercedes cars.
The lucid and lyric don't exist here.
The Porsche doesn't qualify for tax reliefs, nobody is buying them to save money.
The bmw models are more expensive, the i5 is almost 10k more than the EQE, the iX is 3000€ more than the EQE SUV.
The chinese stuff is a bit crap, tesla is a bit crap, and people are starting to avoid them because of politics. Plus, once the tarifs on Chinese built EVs start to take place, they're not worth it. There are literal boat loads of chinese EVs sitting at the port of antwerp, they are not selling.
The i4 is the only exception, and I see a lot of them for that reason. Great value, great looks, not that much power and range, but just enough.
Here's a point where I can agree with you 100%. The new CLA ev thing is going to be incredibly popular, they are not going to sell any EQ car after they release that.
hi_im_bored13@reddit
What problems did the I-series have?
We don't get that car here
Frankly most don't care, and those that do buy the lucid instead.
You can say whatever you want but the sales figures and Mercedes PR speaks for itself. Again, they are the ones changing their strategy, admitting fault, moving back to more traditional looking cars. They are the ones admitting their customers don't need the utmost range and all these gimmicks.
Not when you are comparing leases, and nobody is paying cash for these cars. Again, sales figures speak for themselves. BMW sold 50,981 electric cars in the states, their strategy works and mercedes is shifting towards that.
Guess what, even the model s and x, despite not having been refreshed in years, still outsold the EQE and EQS ....
Say whatever you want. Mercedes disagrees with you, the sales numbers disagree with you, your personal experience doesn't change that.
strongmanass@reddit
The EQE was the worst car I drove last year. The steering was vague, the handling was ponderous, the acceleration was ICE-like in most cases, the brake pedal throw was looong and there was precious little regen to make up for it (though I can just about accept that being a deliberate decision), and the suspension wasn't very supple - which is the one single thing a Mercedes should excel at if it's going to fail elsewhere.
bhauertso@reddit
The L3 drivers assist package. You know, the one nobody buys because it costs more than Tesla FSD despite being usable in essentially 0% of routine driving situations.
AndroidUser37@reddit
If you live in SoCal and commute to work it seems like it'd actually be pretty killer during rush hour.
bhauertso@reddit
And yet, nobody buys it because even in that idealized scenario, it's still not worth the price.
ctzn4@reddit
I have heard complaints about all of these issues from the reviews that I've seen (slow infotainment computer, weird brake pedal that gets away from you, worse suspension and insulation than the ICE S-class, bonked rear steer, etc). You specified "at launch." Has it improved now?
I'm specifically asking because some of the early 2022 EQS and 2023 EQS examples are dipping into the low $40k range. For vehicles that retailed $80-120k at launch, that is a very tempting choice right in line with a ~2021 Model S or ~2021 Taycan.
Did they do OTA updates or recalls/TSBs to fix the rear steer, pedal feel, etc, or did they just fix it in the subsequent years? Any information would be appreciated.
hi_im_bored13@reddit
They did OTA to fix some of the feel problems, it’s not quite as crashy now, steer is much smoother, but it’s still not as good as the iX or the lucid imho.
Worth a test drive
ctzn4@reddit
Sounds good. I'm waiting for a month or two before purchasing, so hopefully all the cars coming off lease will tank the market even further. I definitely test drive and cross shop all the competitors (EQS, Taycan, Model S, Lucid Air, etc). Thanks!
bojangular69@reddit
lol not really
AmNoSuperSand52@reddit
In a vacuum maybe
For the same price I could get a Lucid Air
Godvater@reddit
Better car in many ways also a worse car in many ways. Lucid’s driving assistance is hot garbage.
hardinho@reddit
Yes you could. But nobody is because one company is Lucid and the other is Mercedes-Benz.
RafaelSeco@reddit
The lucid air starts at 71,000usd, in the US. I can get an eqe 350+ with some options for 64,000€, here in Europe.
Lucid air? Never seen one, never heard of one.
F1_Geek@reddit
The Lucid Air claps the Mercedes-Benz EQ line. They're growing in North America.
ctzn4@reddit
It sounds like shill and propaganda, but when you read about the size of a Lucid Air being a 5/E competitor but has the interior volume of a 7/S, you know they have solid engineering to back up the products.
The EQS in comparison is an embarrassment. It's closer to the S class in size but has passenger space closer to an E class. It's a ground up EV that has no frunk but still an incredibly high hood line. The hatchback is one of its last saving graces. "Engineered like no other," my ass. Not the case since the W140.
AmNoSuperSand52@reddit
So basically what you’re saying is the EQS is a good EV when there aren’t other choices
ctzn4@reddit
i.e. in a vacuum void of good competitors 😂
I like it when people own themselves without realizing it.
Jay_Diamond_WWE@reddit
Based on what metric? If they were great EVs, they would be selling. There ARE great EVs out there, but MB does not make them.
RafaelSeco@reddit
I've said this elsewhere. In my country, the EQ mercedes are the cheapest non Chinese option in every segment. The i5 is 9k more, with less range while also looking dreadful.
Loads of range, great interiors and features, not so good looks. And an actual autonomous driving system with certifications and sensors that won't steer your car into oncoming traffic and skip stop signs.
And, in terms of build quality, it's leagues above Tesla and the Chinese stuff.
I've actually seen a red one with white interiors that actually looked decent, but it was an "AMG" model.
Valaxarian@reddit
Don't people here kinda hate EVs?
Dabclipers@reddit
This sub is far more positive about EV’s than it is negative about them. I lurk in virtually every single thread that gets any traction and in threads where EV’s are brought up the positive comments get way more traction.
PlsHalp420@reddit
We don't hate EVs, we hate the fact that we are being forced to adopt them.
hi_im_bored13@reddit
Everyone loves the lucid!
epihocic@reddit
Kinda?
earoar@reddit
They’re completely uncompetitive for the price
FuzzyFr0g@reddit
The sedans are fine, the suv’s are horrible
RafaelSeco@reddit
Classic SUV problem.
If my name was Gelandewagen, I'd be ashamed to be called an SUV.
hi_im_bored13@reddit
Except the G580 EQ, despite its awful name, is a very cool car
RafaelSeco@reddit
Awful car.
As someone who's a die hard G wagon and 4x4 fan, I can't like it. That battery between the axles kills the break over angle, and we all know that EVs can't do off roading, their range is awful.
The change from solid front axle to IFS was already a stab in the heart, but this EV G wagon just kills me.
I don't like it, I don't understand it, and I hope that governments introduce a tax on vehicles that consume too much electricity.
natesully33@reddit
From experience in my Wrangler, that is not the case. Even with my tiny battery I can crawl around for hours in 4lo. A dedicated BEV with a big battery and a more efficient powertrain should be just fine.
hi_im_bored13@reddit
I'm the complete opposite, I absolutely love the idea and have one reserved at the dealer.
Why would you say so? Quite the opposite - the range goes exponentially downhill at higher speeds due to air resistance, at low speeds its ample, and in theory the torque & torque vectoring of a 4-motor setup is better than anything off-road.
I'm not sure of your point here either, especially if you get your energy from nuclear or renewable sources, it is significantly better than the i6 or v8 g-wagons for the enviornemnt.
Not that I am buying one to be enviornmentally friendly, I am not, but its not a viable arguement against the car, unless you'd like to ban the ICE g-wagons as well.
RafaelSeco@reddit
Nothing beats locking diffs off road. 4 wheels spinning at the same rate, locked between each other mechanically.
Instant torque is not good off road. It works on road, but when you throw in adverse conditions, EVs just put down way too much power, or not enough. And once you change the tyres, you can throw all that control away.
Even ABS and stability control is an absolute pain in modern off roaders.
EVs have low off road range, battery degradation is higher when off road, and you can't refuel them instantly and anywhere. It will probably be fine on your local off road park, but that's it. You don't get in an EV and go halfway across the world.
Those are not opinions, they are facts.
And all of those things are not even the biggest issue with EVs off road. Weight.
The fact is that the g580 is a city vehicle. And a city vehicle doesn't need to be a G wagon.
hi_im_bored13@reddit
How is this better than a motor for each wheel, spinning at the same rate?
Quite the opposite, why would you have a low-range gearbox if you want less torque?
Could you explain why? I'm not sure I follow.
Quite the opposite, hill descent, crawl control, all forms of stability control. Traditional safety-oriented road ABS and ESC are detrimental off-road, yes, but the g580 allows you to disable that altogether.
Please cite where you got this info from? EV range is a function of aero/drag first and foremost, which exponentially increases with speed. The slower the activity, the more range you have. Battery degradation is a nonissue, ev batteries will last 10-15 years minimum, and can be refurbished and/or replaced at that point.
Incorrect facts. Your opinions on EVs are significantly misinformed and I suggest you read up a little more.
its a g-wagon its already 6000 lbs in g63 ICE form lmao
Contrary to your previous statement, these are opinions.
jpharber@reddit
Have you ever driven one? The EQS is one of the most awful car I’ve ever driven.
RafaelSeco@reddit
I can't imagine why a 2400kg EV would be a bad driver's vehicle...
I sat in one at the dealership, but I wasn't really interested in EVs, I was there to buy a diesel...
But if felt good, seats were fairly confortable, good materials.
bhauertso@reddit
No, they really are not. Their technology is laughable, the interior design is worse than a night club, they are poorly made (creaks and poor fitment), and they weigh more than they should (versus comparable EVs).
That's all on top of looking poor despite other better-looking cars have similar coefficients of drag.
Multifaceted-Simp@reddit
Bro we all rung Mercedes about dropping the V8, do we want the V8 or not? You guys are so bipolar.
Makeitquick666@reddit
so we can have V8s/10s/12s back right?
allahakbau@reddit
nope
Makeitquick666@reddit
sadge
AwesomeBantha@reddit
didn’t they put a 4 cylinder in the C63 so they wouldn’t have to pay emissions fines? why do they still want the fines dropped
Mercedes seems like a clown fiesta rn
dbpdbpdbpdbp@reddit
They realised that most AMG owners only buy them to put annoyingly loud pipes on them to rev it in front of a kebab shop or shisha bar and the 4cyl just isn't obnoxious enough.
itsamemarioscousin@reddit
It's a fleet average, based on all of the cars sold in a market in a year. Moving a relatively high volume car from a V8 to a PHEV helps massively in that calculation.
I've done a really long reply to someone else - MB's fleet average target in Europe for this year is around 90 gCO2/km on the WLTP cycle.
If you're selling 20k V8 C classes that make 270g/km each, you need 40k EVs at 0 g/km to balance the books.
With the fine levels at €95/g, if you can't balance the books, each unbalanced V8 will cost you 180*95 = €17.1k / car in fines. Which is probably a big chunk of the margin on a €100k car.
Kjartanski@reddit
Because they dont sell and starting this years the EU manufacturer average is based on the cars sold as well as just an average of the lineupe, and MB is heavy on the large luxury barges which are way beyond the Maximum average
ProwarfareZombie@reddit
They realised the brands whole identity and AMG’s department would essentially be a line of ‘white goods’ on wheels.
earoar@reddit
The EU is absolutely going to have to do this if they want to keep their auto industry alive. The Germans simply cannot compete in the EV space against the American and Chinese startups.
It’s going to come down to a choice between tens of billions in economic activity and hundreds of thousands of jobs, or these targets.
Scary-Strawberry-504@reddit
I wonder who's going to work when all the factories close, and the remaining jobs are taken by A.I within a decade
x3nhydr4lutr1sx@reddit
French and Belgian bureaucrats probably rather kill German automakers out of spite.
ProbablySatirical@reddit
My problem with the regulations is that they’re just opaque ever advancing ICE bans. Make ICE so difficult to engineer, expensive, and unreliable that they kill them without an outright ban. The burden should be on EV manufacturers to produce a product that naturally becomes a practical choice. It’s just a misguided savior complex
eirexe@reddit
In some places (such as spain) they are actually de-facto banning EXISTING cars, it's insane.
Sonicblue281@reddit
Yeesh. I hadn't heard about that. How is that? Just raising the inspection requirements for existing cars so high that no combustion car could actually pass?
AndroidUser37@reddit
That, plus banning older cars out of city centers so that you end up hardly being able to drive them anywhere.
eirexe@reddit
It's not just from city centers, its usually all city premises + nearby towns
AndroidUser37@reddit
Yikes, that's awful. I don't understand why people aren't voting out their representatives and pushing back against crap like that.
5GCovidInjection@reddit
Because car enthusiasts are a tiny sliver of the voting bloc worldwide.
AndroidUser37@reddit
How about people with lower incomes who own older vehicles, who are being told to go f@#k themselves and buy a new vehicle if they still want transportation? That seems like a pretty decent chunk of the voting bloc.
Scary-Strawberry-504@reddit
You could also argue that older cars are part of history. The same way an old church or building would be, banning it is unacceptable
eirexe@reddit
Not really, the inspection requirements are usually the same, essentially, the bans are done through a sticker system
Cars with no sticker are older than 2000/2006 for gasoline/diesel respectively.
Cars with B sticker are older than 06/14
Cars with C sticker are newer than 06/14
Currently, towns with >50k population (20k for catalonia, which they ""voluntarily"" chose to lower) have to ban them, consequences for not doing so (starting this year) will be removal of public transport aids among other things. Most of the so-called low emission zones that these comprise aren't just for city centers, they usually encompass the city + surrounding satellite towns.
The bans aren't technically full bans (those would be illegal), essentially, they are just banned from driving from most of the territory from early morning to late afternoon.
Lucaschef@reddit
Madrid has absolutely not started banning B sticker cars, where did you get that from?
eirexe@reddit
my b, i confused it with the planned ban on B sticker cars in barcelona that was pushed back
Lucaschef@reddit
It's a 10 block by 10 block area of Madrid in which you cannot traverse through but can go in if you park inside it.
Source: I go there regularly with my B sticker S55 AMG. So long as you stop to park you're okay.
__qwertz__n@reddit
How do they enforce the ban during the daytime? Police? Automatic enforcement?
eirexe@reddit
automatic cameras
jdmb0y@reddit
If they'd cut to the chase and just made an EV S-Class, none of this EQx stuff, it would have done just fine.
mihametl@reddit
Wouldn't matter.
People don't want it. BMW expected that about 20% of the G70 7 series will be the i7, but the actual take rate is less than half of that if i remember correctly. Why would an electric S be any different than an electric 7?
markeydarkey2@reddit
About 1/3 of 7-Series sales are the i7, at least in the US. In 2024 they sold 10,714 7-Series, 3431 of which were i7's. 2023 had very similar numbers, you can see them if you download the Q4 BMW Group Sales Charts PDF at the bottom of the page.
honour_the_dead@reddit
So what I'm reading here is that the new rules are mostly going to fuck VW somewhere uncomfortable.
Oh and also Mercedes seems to be making an announcement that they are in dire need of new leadership. Bit strange for the old boss to be the one breaking that news.
xstreamReddit@reddit
He is speaking as ACEA president not necessarily as Merc CEO here.
Elvis1404@reddit
EU regulations are something crazy, similar to CAFE laws but much more extreme. That's why the most common cars in EU are rapidly becoming 1L 3 cylinder mild-hybrid Suvs
J0kutyypp1@reddit
Depending on country electric cars atleast with PHEVs make up to best selling cars. For example in Norway 90% of new cars are EVs.
Elvis1404@reddit
In my country the majority of people for now doesn't want EVs because they cost way too much, but because of the CO2 taxes the manufacturers now give us only shitty 3 cylinder cars, many of them suvs, at very high prices compared to 5 years ago (when those taxes were first introduced). So we can't afford EVs but we are also becoming rapidly priced out of decent Ice cars (the cheapest vw golf is almost 1.5 times our average annual salary)
J0kutyypp1@reddit
I'm from finland so we have had CO2 taxes on cars for decades. Upon registeration you also have to pay car tax that is calculated by the value, co2 and the weight of the car. EVs are excempt from this tax so it makes the price difference much lower.
Over here 30% of new cars are EVs and 20% are PHEVs so people are moving to them as the ICE options get fewer all the time. We can afford to buy slightly more expensive EVs because the running costs are fraction compared to petrol.
For example VW Tiguan and ID.4 are practically the same price, ID.3 and Golf only have difference of couple grands and for example Tesla Model 3 is significantly cheaper than competing BMWs and Mercs
Oh_ffs_seriously@reddit
Perhaps it has changed a bit, but here in Poland charging an EV at a public charger is a bit more expensive than refuelling a comparable EV. And if you could charge at home, breaking even would take 150-200k km.
yyytobyyy@reddit
3 cylinders everywhere were offered 10 years ago.
Since the WLTP we are back to 4 cylinders and the efficiency sweet spot is somewhere between 1.3 to 1.6l.
Rocketsball@reddit
So many things the EU mandates on automotive companies are ridiculous.
Own-Neighborhood6828@reddit
Hey did of the emissions BS
Umbra_Draconis@reddit
Do all CEO's now think they are Elmo?
If this guy wants to run a country tell him to join the american oligarchs. They love them now!
Old_Spot_9360@reddit
why
haworthsoji@reddit
Whenever I read headlines like this, somehow I think the left will be blamed for not letting the rich people get what they want haha
Minute-Solution5217@reddit
Will someone think of the poor car companies? They were sitting on their ass while tesla and china were innovating and the government is now telling then to do something!
LifeRound2@reddit
I'd also like to not pay my speeding ticket fine.
ryzenguy111@reddit
Yes no shit?? This is like a thief saying burglary should be legalised
Unspec7@reddit
This is like asking the police to not arrest you if you break the law lol. "Hey could you make this regulation a toothless tiger for me please? thanks"
bindermichi@reddit
Christian Horner said something about Mercedes cars that don‘t work well compared to the competition a while ago.
LoPanDidNothingWrong@reddit
Can’t compete so go beg to government.
MilkyWaySamurai@reddit
Rooting for Mercedes on this one!
V8-Turbo-Hybrid@reddit
Sounds like they already noticed their loyalty buyers crying their huge engines, so they now ask to drop emission fines.
Spicywolff@reddit
Sir you ask to do this BEFORE you shit the bed with an I4 hybrid c63SE. If you succeed, you’d be selling a successful new gen with a v8. Not being ridiculed for that POS bloated i4