RE: Mercedes EQXX does 746 miles on single charge
Discussion
I must admit, I look at the current state of EVs in the same way that I look at PC's. I used to be excited by them in the early Pentium days, but these days, its more like "they're all the same, so they'll all do".
Looking ahead, I don't really care much either. The fact is that they're here now, and they'll do the job. In the future, they'll just get better, etc. But for those who ARE interested, I know Musk has said battery tech improves by around 5% year on year. Pretty soon we'll see options for designers where they can provide the same energy density but in half the battery size. At that point, designers will have entirely new options; keep the battery the same size (and therefore double the range), or, develop entirely new platforms to take advantage of the same range, but smaller / lighter batteries.
But given the traffic, I'm not interested in cars at all any more. Either a motorcycle, or a flying car thanks.
Looking ahead, I don't really care much either. The fact is that they're here now, and they'll do the job. In the future, they'll just get better, etc. But for those who ARE interested, I know Musk has said battery tech improves by around 5% year on year. Pretty soon we'll see options for designers where they can provide the same energy density but in half the battery size. At that point, designers will have entirely new options; keep the battery the same size (and therefore double the range), or, develop entirely new platforms to take advantage of the same range, but smaller / lighter batteries.
But given the traffic, I'm not interested in cars at all any more. Either a motorcycle, or a flying car thanks.
SWoll said:
98elise said:
Olivergt said:
What I want to know is how did they manage the 7.5 miles per kwh when a good EV can only manage 3?
This is like a manufacturer who's cars normally do 50mpg all of a sudden coming out with a car that does 100mpg.
How have they managed to double efficiency?
You can achieve much more than 3 you drive efficiently.This is like a manufacturer who's cars normally do 50mpg all of a sudden coming out with a car that does 100mpg.
How have they managed to double efficiency?
7.5 is still a hell of a jump though, so as with the poster above I call BS. Even with super skinny + efficient tyres and a very slippery shape the 'conditions' for this must be absolutely optimum to stand any chance. In the real world 500+ will be impressive technically from a 100kWh pack in a car of this size.
People have achieved mega miles in Teslas but that's driving at the optiomum efficiency which is something like 27mph, so unrealistic.
samoht said:
Draxindustries1 said:
This Merc has this range as its just a showcase. It's filled with battery packs, there is only a drivers seat.
It has a 100 kWh battery, the same size as the EQS and many other long-range EVs. The gains are in lowering drag and improving efficiency.
Draxindustries1 said:
A Clio 1.5dci will do the same. Up to 70mpg will see 700 miles from a tankful, even old ones from 20years ago.
All at £30pa ved.
I'd much rather drive a half-decent EV than a rattly old Clio though. It also avoids pumping out NOx and CO2, and reduces our dependence on unfriendly foreign dictators for oil The point is not that 700 miles is a super-long way for a car to go on a 'tank', but that if an EV can match an ICE car for range, then its other benefits make it really compelling.All at £30pa ved.
Ref a 'rattly old clio' I'd much rather travel across Europe in one than a EV.
The infrastructure just isn't there for EV's, especially rural
Euro trips we do each year and besides filling up with a dirty fossil fuel takes minutes rather than 30mins to 2hrs for a full charge. Additional emergency fuel can also be carried if necessary, this option isn't possible with a EV.
You mention nox and co2 , that's fair enough but EV's just push their emissions elsewhere ie battery manufacture and power station pollutants whether its gas, coal or worse nuclear.
Until a viable fuel like hydrogen is freely available I personally like many others will avoid them..
Draxindustries1 said:
The image you've shown is a mock up. The car tested had no seating for passenger, the test car had additional battery packs, this test means nothing.
Ref a 'rattly old clio' I'd much rather travel across Europe in one than a EV.
The infrastructure just isn't there for EV's, especially rural
Euro trips we do each year and besides filling up with a dirty fossil fuel takes minutes rather than 30mins to 2hrs for a full charge. Additional emergency fuel can also be carried if necessary, this option isn't possible with a EV.
You mention nox and co2 , that's fair enough but EV's just push their emissions elsewhere ie battery manufacture and power station pollutants whether its gas, coal or worse nuclear.
Until a viable fuel like hydrogen is freely available I personally like many others will avoid them..
The CO2 point you’re trying to make has been proven to be a crock a million times. Yes they stilll produce CO2 but it’s about a third over a lifecycle. Hydrogen is much worse on CO2 and doesn’t have a future (you can tell because there’s only a handful on sale vs ever expanding ranges from most major OEMs)Ref a 'rattly old clio' I'd much rather travel across Europe in one than a EV.
The infrastructure just isn't there for EV's, especially rural
Euro trips we do each year and besides filling up with a dirty fossil fuel takes minutes rather than 30mins to 2hrs for a full charge. Additional emergency fuel can also be carried if necessary, this option isn't possible with a EV.
You mention nox and co2 , that's fair enough but EV's just push their emissions elsewhere ie battery manufacture and power station pollutants whether its gas, coal or worse nuclear.
Until a viable fuel like hydrogen is freely available I personally like many others will avoid them..
Draxindustries1 said:
samoht said:
Draxindustries1 said:
This Merc has this range as its just a showcase. It's filled with battery packs, there is only a drivers seat.
It has a 100 kWh battery, the same size as the EQS and many other long-range EVs. The gains are in lowering drag and improving efficiency.
Draxindustries1 said:
A Clio 1.5dci will do the same. Up to 70mpg will see 700 miles from a tankful, even old ones from 20years ago.
All at £30pa ved.
I'd much rather drive a half-decent EV than a rattly old Clio though. It also avoids pumping out NOx and CO2, and reduces our dependence on unfriendly foreign dictators for oil The point is not that 700 miles is a super-long way for a car to go on a 'tank', but that if an EV can match an ICE car for range, then its other benefits make it really compelling.All at £30pa ved.
Ref a 'rattly old clio' I'd much rather travel across Europe in one than a EV.
The infrastructure just isn't there for EV's, especially rural
Euro trips we do each year and besides filling up with a dirty fossil fuel takes minutes rather than 30mins to 2hrs for a full charge. Additional emergency fuel can also be carried if necessary, this option isn't possible with a EV.
You mention nox and co2 , that's fair enough but EV's just push their emissions elsewhere ie battery manufacture and power station pollutants whether its gas, coal or worse nuclear.
Until a viable fuel like hydrogen is freely available I personally like many others will avoid them..
Hydrogen isn't a fuel, it's an energy store. It's not even a good energy store because it's 3 times less efficient than BEV. Hydrogen has some advantages, but being green isn't one.
EV's don't just push emissions elsewhere. That is a choice. You could easily charge them from solar if you were inclined. The point is the consumer end is being fixed, so any shift from fossil to green has an immediate impact.
Draxindustries1 said:
The image you've shown is a mock up. The car tested had no seating for passenger, the test car had additional battery packs, this test means nothing.
.
Wow, you know you’re getting desperate when you have to make s.
t up. We all know the shortcomings of EVs, the particular shortcoming of the EQXX is what it cost to build. It’s normal driving range from a 100kWh battery is astonishing, why do you feel so threatened by cars like this?A most apposite username ;-)
Draxindustries1 said:
The image you've shown is a mock up.
Pretty good 'mockup' that's capable of being driven on the road with passengers.Draxindustries1 said:
The car tested had no seating for passenger, the test car had additional battery packs, this test means nothing..
Do you have any proof whatsoever that the test car used additional battery packs beyond the 100 kWh declared by Mercedes? If you're going to accuse a major company like Mercedes and a prestigious independent standards organisation like the TÜV of lying, you really should have some kind of evidence or other grounds for suspicion.samoht said:
Do you have any proof whatsoever that the test car used additional battery packs beyond the 100 kWh declared by Mercedes? If you're going to accuse a major company like Mercedes and a prestigious independent standards organisation like the TÜV of lying, you really should have some kind of evidence or other grounds for suspicion.
Drax is a brain dead troll, getting bored of his type on these threads. I’m hoping he reports me as I’d rather be banned from the thread than share it with idiots.Interesting.
Think it would look better without such thick black sills. Paint all/most of those body coloured and I think it would look less awkward. Also think the rear lights need a bit of work.
Like the full width screen - won't be long before there's much better integration of that tech. Not sure why there's no rear window.
Range is fantastic from 100kWh. Would want twin motors personally (useful to have 4wd where we live)....but nice to see manufacturers pushing things (and the excuses those dislikers come up with
).
Think it would look better without such thick black sills. Paint all/most of those body coloured and I think it would look less awkward. Also think the rear lights need a bit of work.
Like the full width screen - won't be long before there's much better integration of that tech. Not sure why there's no rear window.
Range is fantastic from 100kWh. Would want twin motors personally (useful to have 4wd where we live)....but nice to see manufacturers pushing things (and the excuses those dislikers come up with
).Wills2 said:
This sums it up perfectly, why some posters dismiss an increase in range and efficiency is baffling, who wouldn't want to go further on a charge? Cheaper/more convenient/less wasted time/less energy consumption.
I would not want that extra range when having to do a 100 mile detour gets you the most efficient results. It’s only 640 miles from Stuttgart to Silverstone and you have three major options to consider. Why was this trip 746?
I am still impressed with the achievement though.
As others have said what many of us high milers want is a vehicle capable of a realistic 500 miles on a charge at motorway speeds where you are doing 70-75mph and the facility to fit five people in the vehicle with luggage for holidays.
My guess is you won’t even see this by 2030. I’ll stick to my ICE car until an electric car does the above for £40000 or a PCP figure of £500 over 3 years at 30k a year with a months deposit. Thankfully petrol cars will still be available up until 2035.
I would not want that extra range when having to do a 100 mile detour gets you the most efficient results. It’s only 640 miles from Stuttgart to Silverstone and you have three major options to consider. Why was this trip 746?
I am still impressed with the achievement though.
As others have said what many of us high milers want is a vehicle capable of a realistic 500 miles on a charge at motorway speeds where you are doing 70-75mph and the facility to fit five people in the vehicle with luggage for holidays.
My guess is you won’t even see this by 2030. I’ll stick to my ICE car until an electric car does the above for £40000 or a PCP figure of £500 over 3 years at 30k a year with a months deposit. Thankfully petrol cars will still be available up until 2035.
BigChiefmuffinAgain said:
This is very impressive - suggests that come 2030 some electric cars really may be viable alternatives to petrol for those who consistently have to travel long distances. Still not convinced even Tesla are really there at the moment....
Do you really drive a car for 15 hours without stopping? I'm not sure I want to share the road with you if you're concentrating on p***ing into a bottle on the motorway instead of driving. Range isn't the problem. Range for a given cost is. (Apologies if you are obliquely referring to cost as part of "viable", but if so that is really not obvious from your comment.)Recently took our Model 3 Long Range from Suffolk to North Yorkshire and back again, for a wedding. About 250 miles (four hours) each way, with air con on the whole trip, cruising at high motorway speeds or fast A/B-road pace where possible, with no concession to power consumption given. We topped it off at the Grantham superchargers for less than 20 minutes on the way through each way while having a sandwich / coffee. Got home with more than 50 miles of range left. Long distances really aren't an issue (for Teslas at least), right here and now in 2022. Heck, there are Americans who use Teslas to drive what are *actually* long distances with zero issue.
The problem is the (now ~£60k) up-front cost for something with decent range, and that prices are currently heading in the wrong direction due to supply shortages, etc.
That's a breakthrough and a game changer for me.
If I could buy a vehicle that had a 500+ mile range, that I can charge at home and still drive exactly as I am now, sounds like a direct replacement for my current Audi.
Great work Mercedes, you've got my attention. Now, sell it at an accessible price point and the whole market will take note.
If I could buy a vehicle that had a 500+ mile range, that I can charge at home and still drive exactly as I am now, sounds like a direct replacement for my current Audi.
Great work Mercedes, you've got my attention. Now, sell it at an accessible price point and the whole market will take note.
I'll be impressed when someone launches a small family car that is affordable, practical and has a decent range. So far MG offers the best range for the money but are some way off a petrol car regarding price (around a third more expensive). Hopefully the upcoming electric Dacias will get a bit closer to being affordable family cars.
Silvanus said:
I'll be impressed when someone launches a small family car that is affordable, practical and has a decent range. So far MG offers the best range for the money but are some way off a petrol car regarding price (around a third more expensive). Hopefully the upcoming electric Dacias will get a bit closer to being affordable family cars.
It could take a decade before EVs are priced on parity with their ICE equivalents, or it could be a few years away (depending upon which industry forecast you read) Needless to say, manufacturer's are likely to keep building EVs that have the highest chance of making a profit (i.e. big fat expensive luxury ones) until they can subsidise the manufacturing of the "affordable" EVs for mass market that many seem to be waiting for.
modeller said:
I see a few comments about their diesel doing 700 miles on a tank.
So will my X5 .. using 85l of diesel. That's ~900kWh of energy, 10x what the EQXX used!
Sure, as an ICE is as nowhere as efficient (most of the energy being wasted in heat). But at the end of the day, you can do a long-trip without worrying about refueling and that's what matters for the users.So will my X5 .. using 85l of diesel. That's ~900kWh of energy, 10x what the EQXX used!
This being said, this Mercedes EQXX is very very impressive. My understanding is that there isn't one particular miracoulous technical development, but rather that they optimized every item. A 100kWh battery isn't undeard of, but in a 1800kg yes it is... There's also a ton of work on the aero and the cooling, but in the end it's still far from a real production car. Try putting two passengers in the rear seats for instance, I suspect above 8 years old it doesn't work.
big_rob_sydney said:
I must admit, I look at the current state of EVs in the same way that I look at PC's. I used to be excited by them in the early Pentium days, but these days, its more like "they're all the same, so they'll all do"
That'll be how it is.As with 99% of PC/other device owners it'll be the case that they'll use their device, it'll work for a given lifetime and they'll think nothing further of it. Even at a low-middling market point the capabilities available will exceed the average consumer's needs.
There'll be the 1% who do regularly do big/inefficient miles (or are otherwise demanding usage) - analogous with gamers or IT buffs/pros. They're the outliers, but their needs will still be serviced (albeit there'll be a cost.)
6pi said:
Sure, as an ICE is as nowhere as efficient (most of the energy being wasted in heat). But at the end of the day, you can do a long-trip without worrying about refueling and that's what matters for the users.
This being said, this Mercedes EQXX is very very impressive. My understanding is that there isn't one particular miracoulous technical development, but rather that they optimized every item. A 100kWh battery isn't undeard of, but in a 1800kg yes it is... There's also a ton of work on the aero and the cooling, but in the end it's still far from a real production car. Try putting two passengers in the rear seats for instance, I suspect above 8 years old it doesn't work.
You’re last sentence is why a lot of people will hold off on an EV. Lots of comments like “I just stopped off at the services for a quick recharge, a coffee and a sandwich “. I’d like to see a real world test, 4 seats occupied, dog in the boot, roof box and bikes on the back. We may not make those kind of journeys every day but our household vehicles need to cover a variety of roles over there lifetime. This being said, this Mercedes EQXX is very very impressive. My understanding is that there isn't one particular miracoulous technical development, but rather that they optimized every item. A 100kWh battery isn't undeard of, but in a 1800kg yes it is... There's also a ton of work on the aero and the cooling, but in the end it's still far from a real production car. Try putting two passengers in the rear seats for instance, I suspect above 8 years old it doesn't work.
We have an E220 4matic saloon, it’ll easily do 60+ on a run loaded which is a real world 800 miles before reserve. I’d be really interested to see just how far it could go if it had the EQxx’s Aero. Or rather why doesn’t it already have a much lower drag coefficient?
Said before but to aid range in EVs, do you build a car that looks like this:
Or a car that looks like this:
And yet where are the low slung, sleek, aerodynamic EVs? Tesla? Taycan? e-tron GT? It seems that the world started to want SUVs at just the time EVs started to take off so what did car manufacturers do? Build leccy powered 2 ton brick shaped objects.
Or a car that looks like this:
And yet where are the low slung, sleek, aerodynamic EVs? Tesla? Taycan? e-tron GT? It seems that the world started to want SUVs at just the time EVs started to take off so what did car manufacturers do? Build leccy powered 2 ton brick shaped objects.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff