Mercedes EV development
Discussion
Interesting article on the Autocar website about Mercedes' future EVs:
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/2024-m...
Apparently the EQXX concept is a forerunner of a C-class size EV due out in 2024. The claimed range is remarkable:
" the real-world range of the concept, as demonstrated on real roads, at normal speeds and in changeable conditions by Mercedes, nudges 700 miles."
The point which really caught my eye was this comment about a step-change in battery tech:
"Mercedes highlights radical new battery technology as a facilitator of this improvement, with boosted power density allowing for a greater range to be achieved while keeping weight low and maximising interior space.....the EQXX’s circa-100kWh battery – supplied by CATL – is 35% lighter and about half the size of the 107.8kWh unit used by the EQS."
If these claims are born out by the production models, they will be a big step forward.
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/2024-m...
Apparently the EQXX concept is a forerunner of a C-class size EV due out in 2024. The claimed range is remarkable:
" the real-world range of the concept, as demonstrated on real roads, at normal speeds and in changeable conditions by Mercedes, nudges 700 miles."
The point which really caught my eye was this comment about a step-change in battery tech:
"Mercedes highlights radical new battery technology as a facilitator of this improvement, with boosted power density allowing for a greater range to be achieved while keeping weight low and maximising interior space.....the EQXX’s circa-100kWh battery – supplied by CATL – is 35% lighter and about half the size of the 107.8kWh unit used by the EQS."
If these claims are born out by the production models, they will be a big step forward.
Mikehig said:
Interesting article on the Autocar website about Mercedes' future EVs:
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/2024-m...
Apparently the EQXX concept is a forerunner of a C-class size EV due out in 2024. The claimed range is remarkable:
" the real-world range of the concept, as demonstrated on real roads, at normal speeds and in changeable conditions by Mercedes, nudges 700 miles."
The point which really caught my eye was this comment about a step-change in battery tech:
"Mercedes highlights radical new battery technology as a facilitator of this improvement, with boosted power density allowing for a greater range to be achieved while keeping weight low and maximising interior space.....the EQXX’s circa-100kWh battery – supplied by CATL – is 35% lighter and about half the size of the 107.8kWh unit used by the EQS."
If these claims are born out by the production models, they will be a big step forward.
Fundamental electro-chemisty sets an absolute maximum Specific Energy Density at around 9 times that of todays cells.https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/2024-m...
Apparently the EQXX concept is a forerunner of a C-class size EV due out in 2024. The claimed range is remarkable:
" the real-world range of the concept, as demonstrated on real roads, at normal speeds and in changeable conditions by Mercedes, nudges 700 miles."
The point which really caught my eye was this comment about a step-change in battery tech:
"Mercedes highlights radical new battery technology as a facilitator of this improvement, with boosted power density allowing for a greater range to be achieved while keeping weight low and maximising interior space.....the EQXX’s circa-100kWh battery – supplied by CATL – is 35% lighter and about half the size of the 107.8kWh unit used by the EQS."
If these claims are born out by the production models, they will be a big step forward.
Many potential (sic) cell architectures and chemistries exist that have a SED of around twice that of todays cells, the only limitation to the introduction of those architectures and chemistries is the durability and availability (in production volume) of those cells. It is absolutely only a matter of time before a signifcant increase in installed SED occurs, and realistically, even a 50% increase on current SED would, imo, be effectively game changing in most passcar applications.
As the public fast charging network contiunes to mature (at an ever increaing rate), for the vast majority of users a BEV simply becomes another "car"
Max_Torque said:
Mikehig said:
Interesting article on the Autocar website about Mercedes' future EVs:
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/2024-m...
Apparently the EQXX concept is a forerunner of a C-class size EV due out in 2024. The claimed range is remarkable:
" the real-world range of the concept, as demonstrated on real roads, at normal speeds and in changeable conditions by Mercedes, nudges 700 miles."
The point which really caught my eye was this comment about a step-change in battery tech:
"Mercedes highlights radical new battery technology as a facilitator of this improvement, with boosted power density allowing for a greater range to be achieved while keeping weight low and maximising interior space.....the EQXX’s circa-100kWh battery – supplied by CATL – is 35% lighter and about half the size of the 107.8kWh unit used by the EQS."
If these claims are born out by the production models, they will be a big step forward.
Fundamental electro-chemisty sets an absolute maximum Specific Energy Density at around 9 times that of todays cells.https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/2024-m...
Apparently the EQXX concept is a forerunner of a C-class size EV due out in 2024. The claimed range is remarkable:
" the real-world range of the concept, as demonstrated on real roads, at normal speeds and in changeable conditions by Mercedes, nudges 700 miles."
The point which really caught my eye was this comment about a step-change in battery tech:
"Mercedes highlights radical new battery technology as a facilitator of this improvement, with boosted power density allowing for a greater range to be achieved while keeping weight low and maximising interior space.....the EQXX’s circa-100kWh battery – supplied by CATL – is 35% lighter and about half the size of the 107.8kWh unit used by the EQS."
If these claims are born out by the production models, they will be a big step forward.
Many potential (sic) cell architectures and chemistries exist that have a SED of around twice that of todays cells, the only limitation to the introduction of those architectures and chemistries is the durability and availability (in production volume) of those cells. It is absolutely only a matter of time before a signifcant increase in installed SED occurs, and realistically, even a 50% increase on current SED would, imo, be effectively game changing in most passcar applications.
As the public fast charging network contiunes to mature (at an ever increaing rate), for the vast majority of users a BEV simply becomes another "car"
Solid state cells have been shown to have double the density but also some very tricky challenges to overcome to commercialise the technology. I'm certainly not expecting a 2024 mid rang Merc to have solid state cells.. but without them, how on earth have they doubled energy density??
Max_Torque said:
Fundamental electro-chemisty sets an absolute maximum Specific Energy Density at around 9 times that of todays cells.
Many potential (sic) cell architectures and chemistries exist that have a SED of around twice that of todays cells, the only limitation to the introduction of those architectures and chemistries is the durability and availability (in production volume) of those cells. It is absolutely only a matter of time before a signifcant increase in installed SED occurs, and realistically, even a 50% increase on current SED would, imo, be effectively game changing in most passcar applications.
As the public fast charging network contiunes to mature (at an ever increaing rate), for the vast majority of users a BEV simply becomes another "car"
Of course with technology you don't really need to have 700 miles range, what you really want is lighter, cheaper car with ~400 miles. If they make a C-class sized estate that does that I'd buy it.Many potential (sic) cell architectures and chemistries exist that have a SED of around twice that of todays cells, the only limitation to the introduction of those architectures and chemistries is the durability and availability (in production volume) of those cells. It is absolutely only a matter of time before a signifcant increase in installed SED occurs, and realistically, even a 50% increase on current SED would, imo, be effectively game changing in most passcar applications.
As the public fast charging network contiunes to mature (at an ever increaing rate), for the vast majority of users a BEV simply becomes another "car"
It's certainly impressive but there are some limitations.
The EQXX pack is air cooled, not liquid cooled and given the extra density by packing the cells straight into the battery box rather than cells>modules>box I would have thought cooling is additionally important. That would suggest that the car will have limited performance and charging speed as the cells will have to keep their temperature down?
The LEAF packs are air cooled and have had problems outside of temperate climates or when rapid charged regularly. To be fair if you can achieve 600-700 miles, rapid charging is less likely to be important as you are already reaching or at the limit for daily driving. You will need a good AC power source to refill it overnight though.
Also, the car mostly was cruising on A-road equivalents and the average speed was 54mph I believe. It's not slow but it is not motorway speeds, as with all EVs the range would not be near 700 miles if you are going 70-80mph or more on European motorways.
Still, overall great to see all this development going in and hopefully the next gen C-class will be a strong competitor to the BMW i4 and Tesla Model 3 by the sounds of it! 👍
The EQXX pack is air cooled, not liquid cooled and given the extra density by packing the cells straight into the battery box rather than cells>modules>box I would have thought cooling is additionally important. That would suggest that the car will have limited performance and charging speed as the cells will have to keep their temperature down?
The LEAF packs are air cooled and have had problems outside of temperate climates or when rapid charged regularly. To be fair if you can achieve 600-700 miles, rapid charging is less likely to be important as you are already reaching or at the limit for daily driving. You will need a good AC power source to refill it overnight though.
Also, the car mostly was cruising on A-road equivalents and the average speed was 54mph I believe. It's not slow but it is not motorway speeds, as with all EVs the range would not be near 700 miles if you are going 70-80mph or more on European motorways.
Still, overall great to see all this development going in and hopefully the next gen C-class will be a strong competitor to the BMW i4 and Tesla Model 3 by the sounds of it! 👍
alishutc said:
Of course with technology you don't really need to have 700 miles range, what you really want is lighter, cheaper car with ~400 miles. If they make a C-class sized estate that does that I'd buy it.
Totally. Motoring journos obsess over range but actually less is more. If 99% of your journeys are within 200 miles then a car with 400 miles range is just extra weight and cost.The big news in terms of higher density batteries shouldn't be range, it should be the fact it'll be possible to build an MX5 equivalent EV without it weighing as much as a truck.
I'd certainly prefer my EV to lose weight as opposed to gain range.
phil4 said:
I'm not clear how doubling the energy density doubles the range.
Yes, a smaller 100kWh battery is better than a bigger 107kWh battery... but how is the range 700 miles because of that?
I know, that's a bit weird. And there's no significant efficiency headroom to be found in the motor either.Yes, a smaller 100kWh battery is better than a bigger 107kWh battery... but how is the range 700 miles because of that?
The range shouldn't be possible from 100kwh of energy and the idea that they can reduce the weight of the battery pack so much should also be impossible. I suppose we have to wait until 2024 launch to work out just how much is total BS
TheDeuce said:
phil4 said:
I'm not clear how doubling the energy density doubles the range.
Yes, a smaller 100kWh battery is better than a bigger 107kWh battery... but how is the range 700 miles because of that?
I know, that's a bit weird. And there's no significant efficiency headroom to be found in the motor either.Yes, a smaller 100kWh battery is better than a bigger 107kWh battery... but how is the range 700 miles because of that?
The range shouldn't be possible from 100kwh of energy and the idea that they can reduce the weight of the battery pack so much should also be impossible. I suppose we have to wait until 2024 launch to work out just how much is total BS
The aero is active with an extending rear diffuser. I think they were able to achieve 700 miles in ‘real world conditions’.
The production car wont be so extreme in its efficiency, primarily because it would no doubt be way to expensive and impractical for a production car. A watered-down version will inherit some of the concept’s efficiency gains but I don’t expect it will be anywhere near 700 miles range.
GT9 said:
TheDeuce said:
phil4 said:
I'm not clear how doubling the energy density doubles the range.
Yes, a smaller 100kWh battery is better than a bigger 107kWh battery... but how is the range 700 miles because of that?
I know, that's a bit weird. And there's no significant efficiency headroom to be found in the motor either.Yes, a smaller 100kWh battery is better than a bigger 107kWh battery... but how is the range 700 miles because of that?
The range shouldn't be possible from 100kwh of energy and the idea that they can reduce the weight of the battery pack so much should also be impossible. I suppose we have to wait until 2024 launch to work out just how much is total BS
The aero is active with an extending rear diffuser. I think they were able to achieve 700 miles in ‘real world conditions’.
The production car wont be so extreme in its efficiency, primarily because it would no doubt be way to expensive and impractical for a production car. A watered-down version will inherit some of the concept’s efficiency gains but I don’t expect it will be anywhere near 700 miles range.
TheDeuce said:
I agree, it's good headline stuff but plainly a car in two years time won't have double the range of an EV today that has the same size battery.. And I think it's the case a non production test car doesn't even need to be road legal in its design in some countries.
Or have sufficient durability. I think they went to extreme lengths to reduce weight on the EQXX with things like GRP springs and Aluminium discs.The air-cooled battery is interesting. They've focused first and foremost on eliminating losses in the battery and electrical system which then allows for less cooling and thus less weight which means less power to move the car, etc. If they can make air-cooling work reliably for all scenarios in a high capacity production car, that will be impressive.
I've said it before, and I'll keep it saying it, efficiency is king. The relentless pursuit of efficiency as the starting point is the right way forward for production cars and the energy chain that moves them, I'm glad to see that Mercedes appear to agree with me.
Darinz said:
Also, the car mostly was cruising on A-road equivalents and the average speed was 54mph I believe. It's not slow but it is not motorway speeds, as with all EVs the range would not be near 700 miles if you are going 70-80mph or more on European motorways.
You can't average 54 mph over such a long distance without some sustained higher speeds, some of the EQXX's journey was on the Autobahn, cruising at 87 mph.TheDeuce said:
Totally. Motoring journos obsess over range but actually less is more. If 99% of your journeys are within 200 miles then a car with 400 miles range is just extra weight and cost.
The big news in terms of higher density batteries shouldn't be range, it should be the fact it'll be possible to build an MX5 equivalent EV without it weighing as much as a truck.
I'd certainly prefer my EV to lose weight as opposed to gain range.
For me it's more than that though - If a car that can do 300 miles range can only do 200 after 10 years due to wear and tear, it's still perfectly usable. The big news in terms of higher density batteries shouldn't be range, it should be the fact it'll be possible to build an MX5 equivalent EV without it weighing as much as a truck.
I'd certainly prefer my EV to lose weight as opposed to gain range.
If a car with 100 mile range can do 66 miles after 10 years due to wear and tear, it's not useful.
I don't know if those wear and tear figures are accurate at all but the point is valid.
joropug said:
TheDeuce said:
Totally. Motoring journos obsess over range but actually less is more. If 99% of your journeys are within 200 miles then a car with 400 miles range is just extra weight and cost.
The big news in terms of higher density batteries shouldn't be range, it should be the fact it'll be possible to build an MX5 equivalent EV without it weighing as much as a truck.
I'd certainly prefer my EV to lose weight as opposed to gain range.
For me it's more than that though - If a car that can do 300 miles range can only do 200 after 10 years due to wear and tear, it's still perfectly usable. The big news in terms of higher density batteries shouldn't be range, it should be the fact it'll be possible to build an MX5 equivalent EV without it weighing as much as a truck.
I'd certainly prefer my EV to lose weight as opposed to gain range.
If a car with 100 mile range can do 66 miles after 10 years due to wear and tear, it's not useful.
I don't know if those wear and tear figures are accurate at all but the point is valid.
I'm a little over two years with my EV and no change that I can measure yet.
I'm fairly confident when I say that it appears 'most' EVs look to be able to do the same lifespan as an ICE without becoming useless. I'm sure some will prove flawed though as the years wear on.
Gary C said:
Max_Torque said:
Fundamental electro-chemisty sets an absolute maximum Specific Energy Density at around 9 times that of todays cells.
Interesting fact Max, cheers9 times range for the same(ish) weight sounds good.
How near do you see us getting in the next 10 years ?
If the article is accurate, this battery is quite a bit denser than normal: 65% of the weight in half the volume. It seems counter-intuitive that they can get away with air cooling - shouldn't that increased density should mean more heat per volume?
Gary C said:
Interesting fact Max, cheers
9 times range for the same(ish) weight sounds good.
How near do you see us getting in the next 10 years ?
Most OE battery insiders are predicting around a doubling in installed energy density within 7 to 10 years, but that could very easily be exceeded should someones lab tech break through to mass production, which is really where the limitation currently sits. No OE is going to risk fitting potentially limited life / low durablity cells to any mainstream product, and no fitment means no sales/production volume so it's all a bit chicken or egg. But massive sums are now being invested by the cell developers, not just to produce alternate chemistries and architectures but also to full prove them to automotive standards.9 times range for the same(ish) weight sounds good.
How near do you see us getting in the next 10 years ?
With regard to battery cooling, battery power losses are directly proportional to the DCIR odf the battery, and to the square of the current being drawn (as resitive losses are I2R). Increased pack voltage drops current (half current = four times lower loss) and a larger effective cell means lower IR. Most studies show battery losses fallign significantly and the management of those losses improving ie the OE's having more data on how their cars are actually driven, charged and used, allowing a more optimised cooling solution.
Finally, battery temperatures at which performance can be maintained and at which cell ageing is not accelerated are increasing. Chemistries used in ultra high performance motorsport batteries are already demonstrating what is called "high temperature cell operations" and means batteries running at up to 40 degC hotter than they currently do without issue. That obviously provides a direct boost in cooling performance and makes the heat muchg more useful for things like cabin heating etc
It really all depends on the ability to charge. Have 700 miles range is great but not great if you need to charge all weekend before you reach full. While my ICE bow will happily do 700+ which was hand when I did Glasgow and back in a weekend, it's not really everyday motoring. 300-400 mile range which can be done in 20mins is really ideal figures.
Battery improvements will simply make batteries cheaper, which I suspect the manufacture only real goal. Talk of improved range I suspect is more press fodder rather than anything tangible.
Battery improvements will simply make batteries cheaper, which I suspect the manufacture only real goal. Talk of improved range I suspect is more press fodder rather than anything tangible.
ashenfie said:
It really all depends on the ability to charge. Have 700 miles range is great but not great if you need to charge all weekend before you reach full. While my ICE bow will happily do 700+ which was hand when I did Glasgow and back in a weekend, it's not really everyday motoring. 300-400 mile range which can be done in 20mins is really ideal figures.
Battery improvements will simply make batteries cheaper, which I suspect the manufacture only real goal. Talk of improved range I suspect is more press fodder rather than anything tangible.
The improved range referenced was for the EQXX and was achieved from the same size battery. It was due to a much higher efficiency car. Low drag, low friction, low weight.Battery improvements will simply make batteries cheaper, which I suspect the manufacture only real goal. Talk of improved range I suspect is more press fodder rather than anything tangible.
If the battery capacity has stayed the same, why would charging take any longer?
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff