Mercedes to Offer Subscription for Performance Boost to Electric Cars

[heimdali]

On 11/24/2022 at 3:33 PM, Holmes108 said:

 

That's all opinion and heavy editorializing. It's not established fact.

Sure it's fact, it's what Mercedes does.  It's not like they build a car like that and sell it to people and then they suddenly discover that they can increase power considerably if only people keep paying for it.  They must have planned it from the beginning and designed it that way and have buyers pay for it and now they make them pay extra for what they already own and payed for.  You can call it extortion or leeching or whatever.

On 11/24/2022 at 3:33 PM, Holmes108 said:

Edit: I should add that I agree it's probably the worst value ever. I'm just saying legally.

If you like it enough you'd probably wouldn't think so.  Or if you have enough money that it doesn't matter to you it doesn't matter.

[heimdali]

On 11/24/2022 at 3:35 PM, Godlygamer23 said:

The dealership is absolutely the last resort because they will rip you off.

Then you're going to the wrong dealership.  And if you really do own two cars, you probably know that they made it so that you can't get around going to the dealership for anything more than an oilchange or new brake pads (if you're lucky) because an arbitrary place doesn't have the required testing equipment and doesn't have the special tools they need.  And what do you think where the spare parts come from.

 

[wanderingfool2]

4 hours ago, heimdali said:

You have no idea what you're talking about.  Talk to some people who do 1/4 mile races maybe and let them explain a thing or two about energy.

Says the guy who keeps referring to the motors inside EV's as engines...yes I'm the one who doesn't know what I'm talking about /s

 

Oh lets see the law makers mustn't know anything then.  Energy is velocity with mass.  Plain and simple, being able to accelerate to 100 km/h in 5 seconds vs 10 seconds doesn't mean you need better brakes, when the law dictates the brakes need to overcome the power of the motor.

[Godlygamer23]

4 hours ago, heimdali said:

Then you're going to the wrong dealership.  And if you really do own two cars, you probably know that they made it so that you can't get around going to the dealership for anything more than an oilchange or new brake pads (if you're lucky) because an arbitrary place doesn't have the required testing equipment and doesn't have the special tools they need.  And what do you think where the spare parts come from.

As far as I'm concerned, any parts from the dealer/manufacturer are a total rip-off, regardless of the rates that the dealers themselves are charging. They're overcharging for everything. 

 

I own a car from 2002 which is modified, and another from 2013. I will only get parts through the manufacturer of the car if it's absolutely required, otherwise I go aftermarket provided the parts are actually worth it and work the way they're supposed to. 

 

I am not fond of truly modern cars, for multiple reasons, including the high cost for many of the parts, and it's getting worse. 

[heimdali]

14 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Says the guy who keeps referring to the motors inside EV's as engines...yes I'm the one who doesn't know what I'm talking about /s

They are electrical engines.  You can call them motors when you want to, it doesn't make a difference.

14 hours ago, wanderingfool2 said:

Oh lets see the law makers mustn't know anything then.  Energy is velocity with mass.  Plain and simple, being able to accelerate to 100 km/h in 5 seconds vs 10 seconds doesn't mean you need better brakes, when the law dictates the brakes need to overcome the power of the motor.

Show me the EC law where it says that it's sufficient to overcome the torque.  And read up on physics, 5 vs. 10 seconds means four times as much energy, and you do need better brakes to accomplish that.  Designing the car for more power, even when withheld, also very likely means that it weighs more, and thus you also need better brakes that can handle the extra weight.

[heimdali]

14 hours ago, Godlygamer23 said:

As far as I'm concerned, any parts from the dealer/manufacturer are a total rip-off, regardless of the rates that the dealers themselves are charging. They're overcharging for everything. 

That you think so doesn't mean it's true.  Different manufacturers have different levels of prices for spare parts.

14 hours ago, Godlygamer23 said:

I own a car from 2002 which is modified, and another from 2013. I will only get parts through the manufacturer of the car if it's absolutely required, otherwise I go aftermarket provided the parts are actually worth it and work the way they're supposed to.

That only works as long as you can get aftermarket parts that are of sufficient quality.  If you get that quality, the prices aren't always lower.

14 hours ago, Godlygamer23 said:

I am not fond of truly modern cars, for multiple reasons, including the high cost for many of the parts, and it's getting worse. 

2002 is already modern.  We're not supposed to have cars anymore, and they have been made more expensive for over 30 years now.

[IkeaGnome]

6 minutes ago, heimdali said:

They are electrical engines.  You can call them motors when you want to, it doesn't make a difference.

Engines are IC. You call the mechanics when they are having trouble. Motors run off electricity. You call the sparkies. 

They’re similar but different. That’s like saying a pump and a motor are the same and interchangeable. 

[heimdali]

26 minutes ago, IkeaGnome said:

Engines are IC. You call the mechanics when they are having trouble. Motors run off electricity. You call the sparkies. 

They’re similar but different. That’s like saying a pump and a motor are the same and interchangeable. 

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/engine

"a machine for converting any of various forms of energy into mechanical force and motion"

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/engine

"A machine that converts energy into mechanical force or motion."

https://www.wordnik.com/words/engine

"A machine that converts energy into mechanical force or motion."

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/engine

"a machine for converting thermal energy into mechanical energy or power to produce force and motion."

 

4/4 of dictionaries agree that an engine converts energy into mechanical force/motion while only 1/4 of them brings thermal energy into play.  When you convert thermal energy into electricity and use it to power an electrical engine, the electrical engine runs as much on thermal engery as a combustion engine.

 

You can use a pump to drive a boat, and when you do that, it kinda becomes part of the engine that drives the pump that drives the boat ...

 

I leave it up to you to look up what dictionaries say what a motor is.  It's something like this:

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/motor

"a comparatively small and powerful engine, especially an internal-combustion engine in an automobile, motorboat, or the like."

 

[IkeaGnome]

1 hour ago, heimdali said:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/engine

"a machine for converting any of various forms of energy into mechanical force and motion"

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/engine

"A machine that converts energy into mechanical force or motion."

https://www.wordnik.com/words/engine

"A machine that converts energy into mechanical force or motion."

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/engine

"a machine for converting thermal energy into mechanical energy or power to produce force and motion."

 

4/4 of dictionaries agree that an engine converts energy into mechanical force/motion while only 1/4 of them brings thermal energy into play.  When you convert thermal energy into electricity and use it to power an electrical engine, the electrical engine runs as much on thermal engery as a combustion engine.

 

You can use a pump to drive a boat, and when you do that, it kinda becomes part of the engine that drives the pump that drives the boat ...

 

I leave it up to you to look up what dictionaries say what a motor is.  It's something like this:

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/motor

"a comparatively small and powerful engine, especially an internal-combustion engine in an automobile, motorboat, or the like."

 

Weird. Sounds like the entire industry is wrong. It can't possibly be that given a certain context certain names and definitions are expected as the norm. 

Back, sill, mucker, face, stope, muck haul, tit, leg, machine, wire, vent, all can't possibly have a different definition than what you think. Weird that the way mining uses those particular words doesn't seem to come up in any of those dictionaries. 

 

Guess we use fake words. The more you know.

[wanderingfool2]

2 hours ago, heimdali said:

They are electrical engines.  You can call them motors when you want to, it doesn't make a difference.

The way you talk about "engines" and the whole "engine braking".  You are using terms to describe something that is indicitive of ICE vehicles.  It doesn't matter if "technically speaking" it's correct, no reasonable person calls regen braking "engine braking".  The fact is if you talked to any car guy and talk about "engine braking" and "engines" they will NOT assume you are talking about an EV but they WILL assume you are talking about an ICE vehicle.  Also you incorrectly assume that I was talking about using regen braking to meet requirements, which I wasn't.

 

2 hours ago, heimdali said:

And read up on physics, 5 vs. 10 seconds means four times as much energy, and you do need better brakes to accomplish that.

The ENERGY required is exactly the same.  What differs is the time scale the force is applied.  Otherwise your silly definition would have it so that you could tell the difference between a car traveling 100km/h and another car traveling 100km/h based on the amount of energy they have.

 

I'm not about to dig around all the laws looking for a specific quote, but here is at least Canada's laws

https://tc.canada.ca/sites/default/files/migrated/105_tsd_rev_5.pdf

Doesn't specify overcoming torque of motor, but the vehicle is required to stop within a certain distances (at full state of charge).  Which would still bring me back to my point, it's the same vehicle as before, it doesn't require extra brake pads or better brakes.  Simply put they likely have maybe an oversized fuse or are red-lining the system more; which would mean more warranty repairs.  No different than selling an ICE vehicle that you can tweak to make the engine run closer to it's "maximum" at the risk of killing the engine.

[Blademaster91]

21 hours ago, heimdali said:

Then you're going to the wrong dealership.  And if you really do own two cars, you probably know that they made it so that you can't get around going to the dealership for anything more than an oilchange or new brake pads (if you're lucky) because an arbitrary place doesn't have the required testing equipment and doesn't have the special tools they need.  And what do you think where the spare parts come from.

 

That only sounds like a problem if you own a Mercedes car, or any luxury brand car that requires going to a dealer for special order parts,you really shouldn't need to go to a dealer to replace more than an oil filter or brake pads.

2 hours ago, heimdali said:

They are electrical engines.  You can call them motors when you want to, it doesn't make a difference.

I've never heard of an electric motor being called an engine, though an internal combustion engine is sometimes called a motor.

2 hours ago, heimdali said:

That only works as long as you can get aftermarket parts that are of sufficient quality.  If you get that quality, the prices aren't always lower.

That also sounds like a luxury car problem, if I can't go to any auto parts store and get OEM quality parts then thats an issue with the car brand forcing you to go to the dealer.

2 hours ago, heimdali said:

2002 is already modern.  We're not supposed to have cars anymore, and they have been made more expensive for over 30 years now.

I think 2002 is new enough without being designed on purpose to not be repairable unless you're a trained technician. And who says people aren't supposed to own cars anymore?

[heimdali]

32 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

The way you talk about "engines" and the whole "engine braking".  You are using terms to describe something that is indicitive of ICE vehicles.  It doesn't matter if "technically speaking" it's correct, no reasonable person calls regen braking "engine braking".  The fact is if you talked to any car guy and talk about "engine braking" and "engines" they will NOT assume you are talking about an EV but they WILL assume you are talking about an ICE vehicle.  Also you incorrectly assume that I was talking about using regen braking to meet requirements, which I wasn't.

You're using an engine to decelrate, which is called engine braking.  It doesn't matter if it's an electrical engine or a combustion engine.  You're assuming that you could somehow increase engine braking to compensate for a higher power output of the engine, assuming that it actually matters.

32 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

The ENERGY required is exactly the same.  What differs is the time scale the force is applied.  Otherwise your silly definition would have it so that you could tell the difference between a car traveling 100km/h and another car traveling 100km/h based on the amount of energy they have.

I didn't give a definition.  You're talking about energy, I'm talking about power.  You simply need more braking power when you want to decelrate faster, and you need more power when you want to accelerate faster.  I can't do math so I won't even try to show you the formulas; I only know that twice the acceleration requires four times the power, and it doesn't matter if the acceleration is one way or the other, i. e. twice the deceleration also requires four times as much braking power.  Prove me wrong if you can.

 

In any case, you have to have brakes that can handle the performance, and that means that the manufacturer needs to put those into the car, which costs more than weaker brakes.  Now when you look back at the start of the thread, we seem to be talking about a car rated 400HP and when you give in to the extortion, you get an increase of 20--60%.  That means you have up to 640HP, and you're telling me that Mercedes puts 400HP brakes into a 650HP car because engine braking could compensate for it.  Mercedes builds some crap and some good stuff, just like other manufacturers do, but I do not believe that they skimp on the brakes like that.  Do you have proof that Mercedes puts undersized brakes into the car so that buyers don't have to pay as much?

 

Assuming that engine braking could compensate, you need to explain why they would limit the engine braking unless you give in to extortion so that you get more of that as well in order to compensate.  Or is it more likely that they use as much engine braking as reasonably possible to regain as much electricity as they can all the time?  People are usually very concerned about range since the range of electric cars is miserable, because it's difficult to find a place to refill, and refilling takes ages, so foregoing a longer range by limiting engine braking would seem like a very bad move.  If they do limit engine braking as well, well, then that all the more means that they punish their customers for buying a way overengineered car they pay a ton of money for while the car doesn't come close to the performance they payed for unless they give in to extortion.

32 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

I'm not about to dig around all the laws looking for a specific quote, but here is at least Canada's laws

https://tc.canada.ca/sites/default/files/migrated/105_tsd_rev_5.pdf

Doesn't specify overcoming torque of motor, but the vehicle is required to stop within a certain distances (at full state of charge).

So their intention is to make sure that there are fully working brakes since there isn't much electricity from engine braking you could put into the batteries when they are full.  Mercedes can't just skimp out on the brakes, not even in Canada.  As a buyer, you'll have to pay for brakes that can handle 640HP.  How much does the thing weigh?  About two metric tons, maybe 2.5 when loaded?  I'm pretty sure that brakes that can savely handle a 2.5 ton vehicle with 640HP which is (I'm assuming) governed to max 250km/h aint cheap and that they are more expensive than brakes designed for only 400HP --- which aint cheap, either.

 

32 minutes ago, wanderingfool2 said:

  Which would still bring me back to my point, it's the same vehicle as before, it doesn't require extra brake pads or better brakes.  Simply put they likely have maybe an oversized fuse or are red-lining the system more; which would mean more warranty repairs.  No different than selling an ICE vehicle that you can tweak to make the engine run closer to it's "maximum" at the risk of killing the engine.

Of course it's the same vehicle.  It has been designed for 640HP and that's what the buyers pay for, not the 400HP they get.

[wanderingfool2]

23 minutes ago, heimdali said:

I can't do math so I won't even try to show you the formulas

Such a true statement

 

23 minutes ago, heimdali said:

You're using an engine to decelrate, which is called engine braking.  It doesn't matter if it's an electrical engine or a combustion engine.  You're assuming that you could somehow increase engine braking to compensate for a higher power output of the engine, assuming that it actually matters.

Are you even try bothering to understand what I said.  Go to any EV person and start calling it engine braking, they will laugh in your face for insisting on using that term of regen braking.  It's like calling yourself a computer because you calculate numbers.  While technically true, no one uses computer in that context.

 

It's a simple fact that tossing around "engine" and "engine braking" terms when talking about EV's is a glaring red flag that you haven't bothered adapting to the terms used in the industry.  The fact is even if you want to try calling it engine braking, the motor is acting as a generator then and not an "engine".  Even by your definition of engine you cannot call it "engine braking" then, as you are turning motion into energy [the opposite of the definition of an engine]

 

31 minutes ago, heimdali said:

i. e. twice the deceleration also requires four times as much braking power.  Prove me wrong if you can.

I'm saying that you are being stupid focusing on faster acceleration.

 

The fact you can accelerate faster does not mean better brakes are needed.

 

The law I posted, along with all the other laws define a fixed time for deceleration to happen; which it's stupid trying to argue "but you need more to decelerate"

 

The simple fact is that you can lock up your wheels on your brakes, which effectively is what the test is doing.

 

37 minutes ago, heimdali said:

Of course it's the same vehicle.  It has been designed for 640HP and that's what the buyers pay for, not the 400HP they get.

You are purely making assumptions.  They need to overspec components in order for it to last longer anyways.

 

That battery they put in, which makes up the majority of the weight, remains the same (as it's a function of range and charge speed rather than performance).

The motors are likely capable of running at the given speed anyways, but again running it closer to the limit means higher failure rates.

 

It's no different concept than purchasing a CPU and then overclocking.  Overclocking can cause the CPU to degrade quicker, but then it's like people complaining that they should be running it closer to red line anyways.  The simple fact is Mercedes will likely get more warranty returns because of this because they are pushing the system harder with more acceleration.

 

Do I think it's justified for $1000/year, no...but at least I could see some their potential justifications behind it.

[Godlygamer23]

On 11/29/2022 at 9:39 AM, heimdali said:

That you think so doesn't mean it's true.  Different manufacturers have different levels of prices for spare parts.

I have two primary examples to support my position.

My car from 2013 needed a headlight. If I got it directly from the manufacturer(in this case, Dodge/Mopar), it was $570. If I went the aftermarket route, it was around $180. That's the route I went. It's the same headlight, besides the logo from the manufacturer being in the corner. My next example deals with lug bolts/nuts, and the same manufacturer. The lug bolts, if I got them from the manufacturer, were $18 a piece, and depending on where I go, I can get them for $11.67 for the OEM part. I can get a kit of 20(that are higher quality) for $30 from Amazon. 

On 11/29/2022 at 9:39 AM, heimdali said:

That only works as long as you can get aftermarket parts that are of sufficient quality.  If you get that quality, the prices aren't always lower.

I agree with that. But most of the time, the manufacturer is overcharging you because they can. If they're the only place you can get the part, then they're going to charge whatever they want, and that means price gouging.

On 11/29/2022 at 9:39 AM, heimdali said:

2002 is already modern.  We're not supposed to have cars anymore, and they have been made more expensive for over 30 years now.

I would not consider 2002 modern. Compare a 2002 vehicle from even 2013(in my case), and the difference is staggering. Compare it to a vehicle from 2018, and you're on a totally different level.

 

A simple example is replacing the headlight. On my vehicle from 2002, I have full access to the headlights and taillights. I can remove them easily by simply removing the bolts, and pulling the assembly out. I can even replace the bulbs if I want. On my 2013 Dodge vehicle, I have to remove the entire front of the car to remove the headlights because the bumper hangs off the headlights. 

 

The beauty of aftermarket, assuming the quality is there, are cheaper parts because they have less incentive to rip you off and know they won't get away with it. In the case of the manufacturer, such as Mercedes and Porsche, they know that people will buy their vehicles, so they will charge a huge amount of money for parts, well above what they're actually worth.