Mercedes Unveils First Tesla Rival In $12 Billion Attack (bloomberg.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Bloomberg: Mercedes-Benz, the world's largest maker of luxury cars, is rolling out its first in a series of battery-powered models, adding to a growing array of high-end brands targeting Tesla. The Mercedes EQC crossover starts production in the first half of next year, part of a plan to develop its EQ electric line, Daimler AG Chief Executive Officer Dieter Zetsche told reporters in Stockholm at the car's world premiere. The company intended to invest $12 billion on the electric-car push, but the spending has become "more than that," he said Tuesday, without specifying figures. "There is no alternative to betting on electric cars, and we're going all in," Zetsche said. "It is starting right now." The new EQC -- roughly the size of the brand's popular GLC SUV -- features a range of more than 280 miles and accelerates to 62 mph in as little as 5.1 seconds. The Model X has a range of 237 miles. Daimler doesn't plan to establish a dedicated electric assembly plant and will instead build the vehicles at the same sites as conventional automobiles to be able to better adjust output, Zetsche said, adding that he expects demand to mainly eat into sales of combustion cars rather than lure new customers.

Comments

Cue Janice

[Registered Coward v2]

Oh lord, won’t you buy me an electric Benz, My friends all drive diesels I must make amends

Re:Cue Janice

[Anonymous Coward]

running biodiesel full time in my Colorado with the 2.0 Dmax, 98% recycled biomass.

no guilt, but government aint covering thousands of my truck costs in direct subsidy either. oh well

https://propelfuels.com/

Re:Cue Janice

[Anonymous Coward]

err 2.8 dammit

5.1 seconds?

[SuperKendall]

5.1 seconds seems substantially slower than any model Tesla.

Are they making a car to compete against Tesla, or the Volt?

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think they want to compete in sales rather than racing the cars...

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty comparable to non-top end models, that have a 4-6 second 0-60 time.

http://www.thedrive.com/tech/12124/tesla-upgrades-model-s-and-x-for-faster-0-60-mph-times

Re:5.1 seconds?

[JaredOfEuropa]

Superfast acceleration is perhaps #231 on the list of must-haves for prospective buyers of this type of car. The importance things to compete on are range, charging, looks, room, quality, comfort. Especially looks... many automakers get this wrong and think that when desiging an EV, you must toss all common styling wisdom out the window (hello BMW i3, you nasty eyesore). One thing that made Teslas so popular is that they are fairly normal looking vehicles.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Tough Love]

Superfast acceleration is perhaps #231 on the list of must-haves for prospective buyers of this type of car.

Speak for yourself.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[whoever57]

The importance things to compete on are range, charging ...

Yes, and in the USA, all other manufacturers are years behind Tesla in building a charging network that will support long distance drives.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

5.1 seconds seems substantially slower than any model Tesla.

Ummm ... a sub-three second time for 0-60 will put you in realm of some very fast cars.

Maybe Mercedes has just decided they have no interest in making an SUV which can accelerate that fast, because nobody really wants on?

I think you'd probably find that the people buying these may not care about flat out acceleration. 5.1 seconds for 0-60 is damned fine by pretty any reasonable standard, much faster and very few people will be able to keep it under control.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla is fast but unsustainable, only for several accelerations because of overheating. Not like Ferrary, sorry.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

They were more concerned about the bumpers staying on than a meaningless 0-60 time.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[SuperKendall]

Superfast acceleration is perhaps #231 on the list of must-haves for prospective buyers of this type of car.
It may not be top of the list for most buyers but to pretend it sits that low in importance seems not right to me... But beyond that let us proceed...

The importance things to compete on are range, charging, looks, room, quality, comfort.

Tesla's have more range as a top end option. Frankly I think if you are offering anything under 300 you should really go back and keep working it until you can hit that figure reliably.

Tesla has a HUGE lead in rapid charging stations (frankly to me this is the actual #1 for most people for any electric car since it means stopping overnight vs. for snacks).

As you say they mostly look like a real car, and I personally like how the model 3 looks better than almost any modern sedan. The look of the new Mercedes seems OK, though it seems oddly stretched out, like a piece of taffy just being pulled?

Teslas also have good room with extra trunks.

Quality and comfort to me seems about the same in a Tesla as modern Mercedes I've been in. Maybe slightly lower quality but even the top end cars are not that impressive quality-wise if you've attended an auto show recently.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

5.1 seconds seems substantially slower than any model Tesla.

That was 5.1 seconds to get to 62 mph. It took only 3 seconds to get to 60 mph. That last 2 mph is a real bitch.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Luthair]

https://electrek.co/2016/12/23...

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

https://insideevs.com/expected-tesla-model-s-fails...

Re:5.1 seconds?

[vlad30]

Charging Network that is where the real money will be that is the disposable razor just like liquid fuel was for the car till now. The person who owns the most charging stations will be the winner they just have to get through the growth phase and get their plug to be the standard. Have they been standardised yet? and so far all the ones I have seen are unmanned, swipe payment card, plug in, cord rolls back when you unplug.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Luthair]

Large car manufacturers tend to be more conservative in terms of long term reliability so are probably more likely to be cautious when engineering the product to avoid large scale recalls. They also like to segment the market and won't want to cannibalize sales of more expensive models so also designed this to occupy some niche in their product line. At the end of the day the performance only needs to be good enough for the majority of their customers.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[that this is not und]

True, but Tesla has been saying 'up yours' to the mainstream automotive fuel industry. The other automakers have long and congenial relationships with the established gas station chains. Think of the convenience if there was a charging station added at nearly every gas station in the world. You wouldn't have to frequent a specifiC 'network' of charging stations. Gas stations can just add a charging station or two. Which is a lot cheaper than what Tesla has done.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[fluffernutter]

Tesla has a HUGE lead in rapid charging stations

That's why I will be staying with ICE for quite some time. When I buy an ICE car, I don't have to worry about who has the 'lead' in filling it.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Mr D from 63]

And when the car needs service, Mercedes can rely on their existing service infrastructure. Tesla may have trouble keeping their customers happy with limited service locations. High end buyers care about service.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Their ex customers are already fed up with their shit cars.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[whoever57]

Gas stations can just add a charging station or two. Which is a lot cheaper than what Tesla has done.

What makes a gas station a better location for EV chargers than where Tesla has been installing its chargers? The bad coffee? The dirty restrooms? The smell of gasoline?

No one really wants to stop at a gas station. In contrast, many Tesla Superchargers are sited near Starbucks or restaurants. Places where people actually want to stop.

Tesla has nothing whatsoever to gain from keeping the fossil fuel industry happy.

You have to get out of the mindset of an ICE vehicle driver.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[LynnwoodRooster]

The fact they are amazingly ubiquitous, especially when compared to Tesla charging stations.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

My sense is that somd fraction of the market, say those who need to compensate for their lack in other areas, will car about the 0-60 speed, but the majority will not care about a few seconds

I say, good for us! Competition is an awesome thing. I'd welcome Detroit and Japan get serious about the market too, not just a new and an old luxury manufacturer

Re:5.1 seconds?

[rahvin112]

5.1 Seconds will beat a lot of vehicles already on the road including "sports" cars. Jaw dropping accelerations of 3 seconds like the Model S P100D can achieve beat even very high end gas sports cars and are simply beyond what almost anyone would want for your average commute. Yea it's cool and all, but that 3 second acceleration just isn't going to be a big feature for most people.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am amazed that regulators have not stepped in to ensure that charging stations are brand agnostic.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem there is there a number of plug standards for the different cars.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

4 years ago! How about something more recent.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[mSparks43]

probably the conventional thinking. similar to when you could only fill up fords at a ford gas station back in the day I guess.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[whoever57]

The fact they are amazingly ubiquitous,

So are coffee shops and restaurants and parking lots.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

But about the same as say.... Starbucks?

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Four years later, shit Tesla still can’t make it around a race track.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[aaarrrgggh]

The infrastructure required to upgrade a gas station for any reasonable EV charging is non-trivial— likely comparable to removing a fuel tank and remediating some soil. And what exactly do you do at said gas station while waiting for reasonable charge? It might work for truck stops, but not an average station.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Which are completely useless to people that don’t drink coffee.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Registered Coward v2]

The importance things to compete on are range, charging ...

Yes, and in the USA, all other manufacturers are years behind Tesla in building a charging network that will support long distance drives.

True, but that is an advantage that will be shortlived as electrics become popular. Building out a standard charging network at existing gas stations is not that difficult, and will put Tesla up against established companies that have the resources to compete long term. Once that happens, things such as price, service networks and existing loyalties will trump a charging network that is located mainly in cities and interstates. Tesla may find that first mover advantage was not enough.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can build up a charging network but how long does it take to re-charge once you are plugged in? Electric cars are still a novelty because they still have problems your average car buyer doesn't want to deal with. The range is to short and there is not a charging stations to handle the re-charging. If you just want to travel around your average town or city and never driving more than 280-300 miles away from home then an electric car may make sense.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[ceoyoyo]

Sub 5 s acceleration is likely to spill the boss's drink.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they have chillers for the drink coolers and air conditioning. Adding a charger is trivial. Adding a few is 5 days of work and 2 hours of power interruption.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[inking]

It’s pretty low down the list. A Porsche Boxster is a fairly accessible car at the same price level as a medium bracket sedan. Now compare how many Boxsters or Boxster-type cars there are out there vis-à-vis sedans in the same price bracket. Acceleration is really not all that important when your ass hurts.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[SuperKendall]

My sense is that somd fraction of the market, say those who need to compensate for their lack in other areas

And just who do you think is BUYING a Mercedes anyway?

Re:5.1 seconds?

[whoever57]

The other part of that issue is that traditional car companies seem not even be aware of the problem. They seem to think that someone else will solve the charging issue. Even the plans in place put a large proportion of the new chargers in dealerships instead of along highways. Who wants to come off the highway to get to a dealership and then, who wants to wait at a dealership?

Chargers require permits and this process isn't quick in many places.

The lack of attention to the issue by traditional auto manufacturers combined with the head start that Tesla has means that it will still be an advantage for Tesla for several years.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

The important thing is charging fast. Not what Tesla is doing: putting lounges in their newer charging stations.

Fast charge and huge range. Then I can go anywhere plug-in to a normal house power plug at my destination while I am doing something more important than waiting in the Tesla lounge for my slow ass charging short range Tesla to get me enough juice to go 3 more towns.

Tesla has over invested in shit tech chargers.

Dead.

Dead dead dead.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[aaarrrgggh]

A single 40A charger is trivial, but being able to support 2-3 200kW chargers is no small task for most stations. You quickly go from a 200A, 120/208V service from overhead pole-mount transformers to 1,200A, 480/277V with a parking space or two lost for a pad-mounted transformer. Not a big deal if you are in the middle of nowhere (with a good sized distribution circuit available), but it can be quite a challenge. Add to this the changing logistics of vehicular circulation, the need/desire for a canopy cover, the economics of demand charges... and it becomes quite an endeavor. And, still no amenities for someone to hang out for a half hour.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[rtb61]

The supermarkets et al will be the ones with the most chargers. Expect them at all undercover car parks oh and carparks themselves, why refuse the extra income and of course most work places will have some chargers, why waste money with your company vehicles, when you have a roof, make money with it.

Reality is new electric vehicles will not be so much competing against each other but against the infernal combustion variety of motor vehicle. The more electrics in the market, the more popular they will become and people still seem to refuse to accept, yes it is way, way cheaper to charge your electric vehicle at home or at work, than to fill the tank of an infernal combustion motor, way cheaper. No pay for your home to go full solar with batteries and charging your electric car in terms of savings, well, you would think the no brainier would be obvious but of course fossil fueller counter advertising, PR=B$.

What is interesting, is why did Blomberg report it as an attack on Tesla, why the lie. Nothing to do with Tesla, this is an expansion of the attack on fossil fuellers, wont affect Tesla much at all, it will drive demand for electric vehicles across the board though, right in the story 'âoeThere is no alternative to betting on electric cars, and weâ(TM)re going all in,â Zetsche said. âoeIt is starting right now.â', nothing to do with Tesla an attack on fossil fuels. So Tesla's market niche pretty untouched, they are going for the bulk market, the mass market not speciality vehicles at all. Yeah, sell your fossil fuel stocks, in spite of the temporary protection of Blomberg via that corrupted headline.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[gbell]

even the top end cars are not that impressive quality-wise if you've attended an auto show recently.

Can you please elaborate on this? I'm wondering how you can tell. I've heard this from a few mechanics - that cars are now designed to last just past their warranty. Disappointing.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[SuperKendall]

I'm more talking about interior quality when you sit in the cars - even on quite expensive cars it's not uncommon to find cheap feeling (or looking) material everywhere.

If you have an older car, going to a car show can be beneficial - it totally drained me of the desire to buy a new car whatsoever. The only car that appeals at all now is the Tesla Model 3, but I'm still waiting a few more years at least before I get any new car.

What you say about mechanical quality seems to be true as well, but the car shows frown on you crawling under the merchandise so I cannot truly speak to that aspect. :-)

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Zorpheus]

It's pretty much an SUV. Tesla does not sell SUVs, right? For that kind of car the acceleration is very good.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Superfast acceleration is perhaps #231 on the list of must-haves for prospective buyers of this type of car.

Speak for yourself.

Actually most adult drivers would agree with JaredOfEuropa.

You have only to observe how most people drive to know this is true.

It is you who is the outlier.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Tough Love]

So how do you explain engine power inflation? Take any given model, and over the years, look at how the standard engine power increases. OK, explain.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[SuperKendall]

Tesla does sell an SUV, the Model X. It has a range of 237 to 295 miles (P100D), and accelerates 0-60 in 2.9 to 4.9 seconds...

And it has gull wing doors...

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mercedes dealerships ate the ideal place for chargers, since you will be there twice a week for maintenance anyway...

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Electric cars are useless compared to even fifty year old transport options. Everyone needs at least the range of an old junker for those long weekend road trips to the moon with the quad loaded in the back of the cabin or on top of the Saturn V.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[dgatwood]

If you look at total profit from drilling to the pump, I think you'll find that the money is in gasoline. The automakers just aren't involved in it.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Knuckles]

So how do you explain engine power inflation? Take any given model, and over the years, look at how the standard engine power increases. OK, explain.

Feeling safe by having headroom to pull out of situations when needed, the good feeling of getting immediate reactions every time you press the pedal. But a 0-60 difference is not going to make a noticeable difference to that, plus this Merc is an SUV,

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Tough Love]

Ah, yup. Power by any other name. Call it what you want to, everybody wants it.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[dgatwood]

The fact they are amazingly ubiquitous, especially when compared to Tesla charging stations.

To reuse a New York Times quote originally about the Macintosh, Tesla fans "... on the other hand, may note that cockroaches are far more numerous than humans, and that numbers alone do not denote a higher life form."

But in all seriousness, gas stations and Tesla superchargers are fundamentally different in ways that make them inherently incompatible:

• Gas stations are designed for high turnover, on the order of five minutes per customer. Tesla superchargers have to handle one car parked in the same spot for anywhere from 30 to 80 minutes.
• Gas stations have fuel. Tesla superchargers have large transformers and, in many cases, power walls that represent a significant risk of fire or small explosion when they fail. If installed close enough to a gasoline tank, this poses a significantly elevated risk of amplifying the original problem.
• Gas stations are almost always designed with minimal parking, because they want to cram as many pumps and as big a store as they can to maximize their ability to serve their existing customers. This means they don't have any space in which they could realistically park cars for an extended period of time.
• Gas stations are mostly built near the freeway, which is largely undesirable for other types of business. Thus, most gas stations have nothing to do for miles around. This isn't a good fit if you're going to be there for an hour or more.

Basically, it is like trying to cram a drive-in movie theater into a porno theater, and for almost precisely the same reason. The ideal locations for charging are stores that people shop at for an extended period of time and/or large parking lots adjacent to restaurants where people spend an hour or more eating. Putting a Tesla Supercharger next to an Olive Garden is a good fit. Putting a Tesla Supercharger next to a Target is a good fit. Putting a Tesla Supercharger next to a gas station beside a freeway offramp is not.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Mercedes tends to have 30000km maintenance intervals on petrol models. I'd imagine EVs have intervals at least as long.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[dgatwood]

Building out a standard charging network at existing gas stations is not that difficult ...

You know not of what you speak. Building up a slow AC charge setup would not be that difficult, except for the little problem of having to leave your car at a gas station for 18 hours to charge it.

Building up a DC fast charging network at existing gas stations is technically infeasible because of the space involved. A typical DC fast charging setup requires enough space to park about 14 cars, to serve only 10. It is best suited for companies with large parking lots, like Target or Wal-Mart, not gas stations, which never (+/- some small margin of error) have enough space for even two or three DC fast chargers, much less enough to be practical without large amounts of Internet-based coordination of which cars go to which gas stations.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

The number is actually not as meaningless as it seems: it's a measure for the amount of power the motors can convert from electrical to mechanical, and it goes the other way as well. The higher the acceleration numbers are, the higher the electric deceleration numbers will be and that means that more energy can be converted back to electric when braking (if the electronics and batteries can take as well as deliver). And that quite reduces the energy costs of a "sporty" driving style.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Barsteward]

A lot of power inflation means better efficiency and economy and companies seem to need a "halo" model for encourage meaningless chatter. The 0-60 is a "I can piss higher up the wall than you" thing, more important is acceleration for overtakes - thats where they should produce measurements of note.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Barsteward]

and considering 90%+ journeys are short and around town, electric cars do make sense. people charge overnight at home so charging stations (i.e. not queuing up at smelly gas stations) not necessary for them unless on an longer distance trip.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Infernal combustion engine lol. Don't change it, good for a laugh.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[AmiMoJo]

5.1 seconds is faster than base model Teslas. The Model 3 non-performance is "slower" than that. And by slower I mean by a fraction of a second that no-one cares about except fanboys playing Top Trumps.

Range wise 280 miles is pretty decent. Take the Hyundai Kona, which is rated for just under 300 and will do a solid 250 at 70 MPH. That's 3.5 hours of solid driving, say 3 hours to allow some buffer. Don't know about the US but in Europe that is getting close to the legal limit for commercial drivers to take a break.

Keep in mind that this is a European car and European charging infrastructure is very different. Here we have decent CCS networks in many countries, while there is often a lack of Tesla superchargers. And often the superchargers are a little way off the main routes while CCS tends to be at motorway service stations and the like, so often supercharging doesn't offer any real speed advantage.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

The freeway issue is going to need to be solved for electrics, though. The general model is that you charge the car at home overnight, generally, and use the charger network for long trips... generally long-distance trips are going to make use of freeways, so there will need to be charging stations along freeways with something to do during the charge time.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[dunkelfalke]

Higher weight. Here is a typical example of probably the most common German car:

VW Golf 1, 750-805 kg kerb weight, 50-70 hp.
VW Golf 7, 1205-1540 kg kerb weight, 85-180 hp (non-GTI version).

Add to this the general population becoming heavier and you'll have your answer.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[shilly]

Eh?

A 43kW or 50kW charger is just not that big whether AC, DC or both, and is pretty fast.

Look here for a picture of one:
http://myrenaultzoe.com/index....

There are tons of these chargers all over the UK. Being blocked by another EV charging is rarely an issue -- the bigger issue is being blocked by an ICE car parking where it shouldn't.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[shilly]

I disagree that rapid charging station infrastructure is so important. My little EV (Renault Zoe) goes only 90 miles between charges. Makes no difference to us: we drive beyond that only a few times per year, and there's more than enough 22kW and 43kW chargers in the UK for it to be easy to charge en route for those few journeys. Our next Renault Zoe will have a range of 180 miles, at which point we'll need a public charger perhaps twice a year.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[thegarbz]

Frankly I think if you are offering anything under 300 you should really go back and keep working it until you can hit that figure reliably.

Why? Tesla may be big in the USA but Mercedes is a European company, and there are far more popular electric cars than Tesla in the EU, the most popular of which has a sub 200mile range. Range may help the anxious Americans but it isn't a selling feature for many.

Tesla has a HUGE lead in rapid charging stations

Tesla has a huge lead in the USA. In Europe charging points are dime a dozen. Most en-route charging points go unused (people charge at home). And within the next 2 years Tesla's nextwork is expected to be dwarfed by the Ionity system both in number and in capability (Tesla doesn't have 350kW stations yet, Ionity does).

Teslas also have good room with extra trunks.

Another thing that concerns few.

Generally it would seem that people are just as quick to dismiss alternatives as the media is to use the label "Tesla Killer". The real world with European car manufacturers sits in the middle, a place where Tesla is actually just a competitor unlike "the only option" as it is in the USA.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[lgw]

It's the same performance as their plug-in hybrid GLE (which I was just looking at), which is the fastest GLE engine option unless you go AMG for $120k. But this is the same size as the GLC, where the fastest non-AMG model is the hybrid with 0-60 in 6.2 seconds. It's plenty fast for 99% of SUV drivers.

Hopefully they'll follow up with the full line of SUVs, not just a crossover to compete with the Model X. However, you can tell Mercedes isn't 100% sure of the quality here, as they normally introduce new tech in their highest-end models for a high margin, then eventually work down the range.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[michelcolman]

Range is quite a bit lower as well. So basically they have shown a car that will come out in 18 months, is slower and has less range than today’s Teslas. And will probably cost more, too...

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

as an EV owner, I must stress the quality... these cars are so quiet, you hear every super-little rattle, twitch etc... not to mention the basic aerodynamic/tire noise - but those you filter out naturally...

what many petrol/diesel brands seem to be doing is to take the chassis/platform from non-EV model and stick electric engine/battery into it... will not work re the perception of quality

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Knuckles]

Yes, power, but for an SUV a 0.5 sec from 0-60 difference is probably not the decisive factor. The success will be decided by other factors, and we don't know yet if the Merc is good enough.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

The other part of that issue is that traditional car companies seem not even be aware of the problem. They seem to think that someone else will solve the charging issue. Even the plans in place put a large proportion of the new chargers in dealerships instead of along highways. Who wants to come off the highway to get to a dealership and then, who wants to wait at a dealership?

Chargers require permits and this process isn't quick in many places.

The lack of attention to the issue by traditional auto manufacturers combined with the head start that Tesla has means that it will still be an advantage for Tesla for several years.

Someone else WILL solve the charging issue. Once a critical mass is hit, grocery stores, retail stores, and possibly even restaurants will add charges to compete for customers. They can also be another source of revenue. You might even find new types of "EV Stops" along interstates where you can find something entertaining to fill your 30 minutes.

ICE companies didn't build gas stations.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

My guess is that they're trying to avoid the rather infamous Tesla battery overheating problem. Teslas accelerate very quickly a few times, then the pack overheats and it goes in to limp mode to protect the pack. They're sort of famous for this among car guys. It's the number one reason they're garbage on the track.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Registered Coward v2]

The other part of that issue is that traditional car companies seem not even be aware of the problem. They seem to think that someone else will solve the charging issue. Even the plans in place put a large proportion of the new chargers in dealerships instead of along highways. Who wants to come off the highway to get to a dealership and then, who wants to wait at a dealership?

I would not say they are unaware of the issue as the have made some moves to a standard charger plug in anticipation of a growing market. It's more of a lack of sales to warrant spending money on the issue and seeing EVs as more of city commuter cars at present where charging is not an issue. Once sales grow, the can work with existing infrastructure such s gas stations, restaurants, etc. to build out a charging infrastructure; as well as create consortiums to address battery limitations to lower the costs of R&D and production.

Chargers require permits and this process isn't quick in many places.

An issue Tesla faces as well. In any case, once EVs are more popular I could see the permitting being easier, especially for places such as gas stations which already have meet some stringent permitting requirements and probably already have the necessary electrical infrastructure in place to handle charging stations.

The lack of attention to the issue by traditional auto manufacturers combined with the head start that Tesla has means that it will still be an advantage for Tesla for several years.

The question is several years long enough for Tesla to grow enough to have the economies of scale to withstand the competition from the major manufacturers? Tesla right now has a cool factor. Will that last?

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Registered Coward v2]

Building out a standard charging network at existing gas stations is not that difficult ...

You know not of what you speak. Building up a slow AC charge setup would not be that difficult, except for the little problem of having to leave your car at a gas station for 18 hours to charge it.

Building up a DC fast charging network at existing gas stations is technically infeasible because of the space involved. A typical DC fast charging setup requires enough space to park about 14 cars, to serve only 10. It is best suited for companies with large parking lots, like Target or Wal-Mart, not gas stations, which never (+/- some small margin of error) have enough space for even two or three DC fast chargers, much less enough to be practical without large amounts of Internet-based coordination of which cars go to which gas stations.

A DC fast charge needs 480 - 600V 120 amp circuit. As for space requirements, malls seem to easily install one or two in parking garages, which do not have large space availability for the installation, since they are siting them on higher levels of a parking garage, and enough to meet ADA requirements. Yes, the older 4 pump station/quickmart may be space limited; if you look at may of the newer service stations, they have plenty of equivalent parking space (handicapped parking space sized) to install 4 or 5 fast chargers, and even more if it is a car/truck stop site; most of which are along interstates where most long distance travel will occur. The challenge will be the electric infrastructure, both capacity at the location and grid impact. Utilities will need to be involved with build-outs to ensure grid stability. I refer you to: http://www.ct.gov/deep/lib/dee...

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Its a shame then that the range of the EQC is mediocre at best: about 200 miles, but that is just guessing because MB is attempting to baffle with bullshit and using an "estimated" NEDC range of "up to 480km".

In other words, it is:
    - (relatively) slow
    - unimpressive range (~200 miles)
    - expensive
    - sub-par cargo space

by your measure it, at best, hits: looks, quality and comfort. This is certainly not a Tesla rival.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[whoever57]

I would not say they are unaware of the issue as the have made some moves to a standard charger plug in anticipation of a growing market. It's more of a lack of sales to warrant spending money on the issue and seeing EVs as more of city commuter cars at present where charging is not an issue.

You are in the same mindset as the traditional manufacturers. It's a chicken-and-egg problem. Sales will continue to be limited until the charger infrastructure for long journeys is in place. If you wait for sales to happen before building the infrastructure, they won't happen.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Many if not most UK park and ride car parks have a few charging points, ditto motorway stops, and a few supermarkets.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[DarthVain]

I think the big tipping point will be one of two things (for all electric). Basically anyone who owns a car that does any long distance driving needs one of the two capabilities:

1) An abundance of charging stations available along at least major routes AND rapid charging technology that can charge the car in seconds or at most a few minutes.

2) A range of about 900km (560miles).

#1 is basically analogous to the capabilities of combustion engines, while #2 would allow you to hopefully not care that it takes a significant time to charge. To explain, one can comfortably drive about 900km in about 10h which is probably as far as anyone is want to drive in a single day. You could do 12, but it is a real drag, and I've done 18-20 which really is just crazy and people probably shouldn't. At 900km you get a full 10h of driving time in a day, to which you presumably would stop for the night, and then be able to simply charge slowly over hours while you sleep. Now you'd probably want a bit more than 900km in reserve just so you're not left high and dry should you have trouble finding a place to stop with a charging station.

Anyway both those are pretty tall orders for today's technology. There is a 3rd option, which is a bit of a hybrid of the two, where your charge time is say less than an hour, while at the same time your range is around 450km. This would allow say a driver to stop for lunch, charge, and continue on your way, again having a reserve might be nice to be able to go to dinner locally without ditching your car at the hotel to charge first. It would also require a lot more charging stations obviously.

We're not there on any of those fronts (yet), so while a totally electric car has its uses, it just isn't an option if you EVER want to use it for long distance driving. Current technology does fit the bill I think for commuter, around town, and short haul tripping now. So if that is ALL you plan on using it for, you're already good to go. Not really an issue for two car households where one car is conventional, and the other is all electric, as you have the flexibility to use the car best suited to your needs. That said, for single car households, if you ever plan on doing any real traveling it isn't an option (unless you want to spend thousands renting a conventional car for the few times you might need it a year).

Anyway I looked at the math and how it might work in practice, but it just doesn't work yet (at least insofar as my requirements), and given technological advances, probably won't for sometime (though I think we'll get there eventually... ha! no pun intended!). As a commuter car, it is probably the most reasonable, and is analogous to the two car setup that many households have where in the past one might be smaller and more economical on gas for commuting which is what it would be used for 90% of the time. As someone who doesn't commute to work, with a one household car, that does at least two long trips a year, the logic just doesn't exist yet.

I know one EV I've lusted at (that will probably never get built or exist) is the Bollinger, which I think has a fictional range of 200 miles (320km), and despite all the ways in which I might work the numbers and try to figure out how it might work, just wouldn't. That said, were I rich and not care and could own multiple cars, for sure! However for now, and for the foreseeable future, the EV rests solidly limited to the commuter role, and sales will reflect that. Should the above limitations be surpassed, that is when sales and the market for EV's truly take over from combustion and probably spell the end of the combustion car with the exception of collectors...

Re:5.1 seconds?

[jareth-0205]

Tesla has a HUGE lead in rapid charging stations

That's why I will be staying with ICE for quite some time. When I buy an ICE car, I don't have to worry about who has the 'lead' in filling it.

This is one of those problems that goes away completely once the range passes a certain threshold. For me that's about 250 miles - I am not going to drive further than that without a reasonable break because my human brain can't do it. Maybe for you it's 350, or 500, but at some point you're going to be the range limiter, not the car. And we're not far from that figure, ranges are going up yearly.

Then it's going to be hard to ignore the complete dominance in advantages in pretty much every other sphere of driving. (fuel cost, responsiveness, maintenance cost, engineering simplicity...)

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not much slower than the 'poor man's Tesla' (Model3)

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

All electric cars beat anything that has an exhaust pipe, unless the exhaust thing cost 10x as much.

Right now, an electric car don't need to be "Tesla fast", as long as it beats the neighbours gas-powered BMW. And they all do.

Someday, electrics will compete with each other. Some will go for fast, some for comfort, some for range. But right now, the fun is in driving a cheap car and still see those former "sports cars" in the rearview mirror.

Who cares if gas has "better range", gas already lost the race when the lights turned green. No acceleration to speak of with gas. Horsepower exists only in a small RPM range - sheesh.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially looks

A primary role of a car is being a fashion accessory.

Styling changes far more often than the car's tech.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're still thinking like a gas car owner when you say "Building out a standard charging network at existing gas stations". Electricity is already everywhere, so charging stations can be everywhere. There's no reason to concentrate them especially at gas stations. As an EV owner, the last place I want to go for charging is a gas station. That's why Tesla builds their chargers (mostly) at shopping malls and grocery stores: they're places people like to hang out while the car charges for 30 minutes or so. Gas stations will die or evolve into just convenience stores, which is where they make their money anyway; selling gas is break-even at best and is just a hook to get people to stop.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Strudelkugel]

Since I tend to keep cars for a long time, I want to know the manufacturer will be around in the future. Sure, Teslas have a lot of showroom appeal, but I would be hesitant to spend mid to high 5 figures, let alone 6 on one and not know if Tesla will be around in 4 or 5 years to provide parts and service. I'm confident Mercedes, Jaguar, GM, BMW and Porsche will be, for example.

That said, even if Tesla does go BK there is an emerging aftermarket for the cars which reduces the risk to some extent.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[squiggleslash]

I am all superfast acceleration on this blessed day!

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

To compensate for mass increase.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people will hire a car locally anyway when they go to the USA.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

They have. All charging stations in Europe have to offer CCS.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[fluffernutter]

Last time I was on a long road trip my wife and I took turns, so that was our break. We ate lunch from a cooler in the back. Seriously, if there isn't anything interesting to see why stop.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[jareth-0205]

You must admit though that's not exactly a common use, especially in countries that don't span continents and that do have train systems. After a certain distance it's much nicer to ride at 150MPH than manually drive at 70. This one use-case that EVs are not good for... I don't get why that's *such* a massive focus.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not according to the article, the range is significantly higher.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

"All electric cars beat anything that has an exhaust pipe, unless the exhaust thing cost 10x as much."

That's just not true.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[fluffernutter]

I'm in Canada, the train is not very practical. Almost as expensive as flying, only goes east-west, you can only take limited luggage with you, plus you still need to rent when you get there.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[LynnwoodRooster]

Many (if not most) of which don't have parking lots or the ability to service cars. Never seen a gas station where you could not drive and park cars at it, though...

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

Starbucks does not sell coffee. They sell half caf decaf mocha Frappuccino yuppie/millennial crapwater with a shot of pretentiousness, but not coffee.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[LynnwoodRooster]

How many supercharger stations are there? And how many cars does each service? There are around 168,000 gas stations in the US, and they can handle at least 4 vehicles (many can handle 12 or 16 at a time).

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[michelcolman]

The article is wrong. Model X range is 295 miles. And Mercedes is using the old NEDC standard which gives deceivingly high numbers.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[whoever57]

Get your mind out of the ICE mindset.

Most EVs charging will take place overnight, or in office car parks. Numbers of gas stations are irrelevant. You can't project the number of gas stations into anything useful for EV charging.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[dgatwood]

A 43kW or 50kW charger is just not that big whether AC, DC or both, and is pretty fast.

A 50 kW charger will charge a Tesla in 2.5 hours or so. That's not "pretty fast". That's less than half the speed of a Supercharger. Also, it isn't the charger that takes up space. It's the dedicated building transformer required to provide 480V or 600V service at the requisite amperage and, in many cases, the Powerwall hardware required to smooth out the power delivery as a workaround for the power company's inability to reliably provide said high-amperage service at that location.

There are tons of these chargers all over the UK. Being blocked by another EV charging is rarely an issue -- the bigger issue is being blocked by an ICE car parking where it shouldn't.

Here in the U.S., that's usually not a problem. It is rare to see a supercharger space stay empty long enough to get ICEd. :-)

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[dgatwood]

No, the freeway issue doesn't need to be solved. Tesla Superchargers *are* along freeways. They're just a mile or two away so that they are in areas where there are things to do, rather than right at the offramp, where you'll find nothing but gas stations.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[shilly]

1. The world is bigger than the US. Smoothing out power delivery isn't an issue everywhere. I can promise you that all those 22 and 43 kW chargers in Europe do not have their own dedicated building transformers.
2. The EV market comprises more than just Teslas. There are tons of cars that can charge to 80% in 30 to 60mins at 22 / 43 kW chargers. In the UK, there's the i3, Leaf, Zoe, Smart forTwo, eGolf, eUp, Ioniq, iOn Electric, C-Zero, Kona, and Soul. In fact, you have to work pretty hard to find an EV that won't do this.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Waccoon]

Only on the outside. Getting rid of every control and replacing it with a touchscreen is as far from "normal looking" as it gets. Personally, I consider the interior of the Model 3 to be a disaster of modern UX brought into the automobile. If I want to adjust my seat, I'll push a button on the seat, not swipe and swoop through a ton of menus that will all change on the next forced software update.

But then, Teslas are very much still luxury vehicles, so like all the luxury vendors they have to do stupid trendy crap to stand out. If they were truly normal, they wouldn't get any attention.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[lgw]

From observation: successful, wealthy immigrants worried about acceptance in society.

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[lgw]

The Model X is a crossover, not an SUV.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Registered Coward v2]

I would not say they are unaware of the issue as the have made some moves to a standard charger plug in anticipation of a growing market. It's more of a lack of sales to warrant spending money on the issue and seeing EVs as more of city commuter cars at present where charging is not an issue.

You are in the same mindset as the traditional manufacturers. It's a chicken-and-egg problem. Sales will continue to be limited until the charger infrastructure for long journeys is in place. If you wait for sales to happen before building the infrastructure, they won't happen.

The difference between traditional manufacturers and Tesla is they are not dependent on EV sales to survive and thus can wait for infrastructure to develop over time; Tesla had no choice if it wanted to be seen as a viable alternative to a ICE vehicle. No one is going to invest the money it takes to build a charging station until they can turn a profit. Traditional manufacturers are selling mainly commuter vehicles, which do not need a charging network beyond home, mall and work. I suspect much of the initial build out will occur near population centers at gas stations, etc. to start tapping into the market for fast charging. That also will allow driving between population centers since charging will be available at both ends of the rip. Once enough are sold, and people get used to EVs, manufacturers will start selling more vehicles suitable for longer trips and the infrastructure will follow more rapidly along interstates, main highways, etc..

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[LynnwoodRooster]

Provided you have enough parking spots at each of those locations - which is not always the case. I am in San Diego right now for CEDIA and the apartment I'm renting has 0.8 parking spots per unit - and some units have two occupants each with their own car, and they are parking on the street, rushing to leave by 8 AM so they don't have to feed the meter. So we can build out a massive number of new chargers everywhere, or convert a massive infrastructure that already has power and space to provide those quick 15-20 minute charges to get you around if needed.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Agripa]

Higher weight. Here is a typical example of probably the most common German car:

VW Golf 1, 750-805 kg kerb weight, 50-70 hp.
VW Golf 7, 1205-1540 kg kerb weight, 85-180 hp (non-GTI version).

Add to this the general population becoming heavier and you'll have your answer.

At least in the US you can attribute part of this to EPA regulations which require higher fuel efficiencies on lighter vehicles. Build a heavier vehicle may be less expensive than a more efficient one.

Re:5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

AMG will probably take care of that. Also, the inital versions of the Model S took more than 5.1 seconds (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S#Specifications

Re: 5.1 seconds?

[Anonymous Coward]

How many people have gas stations at their homes or where they work or shop?
Try thinking before opening your mouth.

so close

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla is right on the cusp of moving to large scale production. So close. 1-2 years, and it would be highly dominant in the marketplace.

But if too many traditionals enter, and enter well..... that could all vanish.

Re:so close

[bobbied]

If Mercedes is really going to sell electric cars, Tesla will have completion in their niche market, which means Tesla is more rapidly running out of runway. Now they have price competition and less of a differentiator for their products. Their margin for error was always pretty small, but this will only make it smaller.

I think Musk sees this coming, which explains his erratic behavior of late as CEO of Tesla. I hope I'm wrong, but it doesn't look like he's taking the stress very well.

Re:so close

[Herkum01]

BMW says they are selling a new car, basically 6 to 9 months from now, big deal. Tesla always had competition, but never really good competition. The two I think of off the top of my head are the Leaf and the Volt. I know there is more but I am too lazy to list all of them. It is enough to say that right now, it is not a one company market and right now Tesla is controlling it.

Mercedes all said they are just getting start and aren't dedicating a factory because they don't want to over-commit to the market. They are procrastinating other manufacturers and let Tesla own a large market. If they were confident they could sell a large number of their cars they would be preparing long term instead of basically doing a limited production line.

When Tesla is able to actually meet market demand (they don't need a reservation list) what do you think people are going to buy Mercedes or Tesla? That will be interesting but it will be at least another 2 or 3 years before that happens.

Re:so close

[bobbied]

Mercedes isn't the paragon of virtue quality wise. They have their own quality issues. My brother is a Mercedes dealer mechanic (among the top 10% in the nation) and he told me that there are a number of models he'd never recommend anybody buy. Their SUV initially had some serious quality issues with the electronics packages and once they fall out of warranty, few folks keep them due to their huge maintenance costs, so they get junked pretty quick.

But you do make a valid point. Tesla needs to get that factory working and stop messing around. They don't have time to mess with any new features, but need to start pushing out cars at a profit. They have to make good and start recouping their investors' money.

Long term, Tesla will face a serious issue with their build costs. That's where the majors will clean their clocks. They know how to run the supply chain, drive costs down on volume and build cars accurately and quickly. Tesla will struggle there too. Their margin for error is very small.

Re:so close

[Mr D from 63]

If Mercedes is really going to sell electric cars, Tesla will have completion in their niche market, which means Tesla is more rapidly running out of runway. Now they have price competition and less of a differentiator for their products. Their margin for error was always pretty small, but this will only make it smaller.

I think Musk sees this coming, which explains his erratic behavior of late as CEO of Tesla. I hope I'm wrong, but it doesn't look like he's taking the stress very well.

Seems like Goldman Sachs agrees. They have stock rates as a sell and think it will drop to $210. Bad news for those hoping they'd recover to the $360 convertible debt strike price by February. With production numbers falling behind recent targets, it is hard to see how the stock can be lifted that much in the next 6 months. With competition coming in their high end niche, and with the apparent struggles to find a way to be profitable off of something in the mid priced range, they have some tough challenges ahead.

Re:so close

[Anonymous Coward]

Ehh, GS has been bearish on Tesla for years now and clearly have skin in the game. Plus they are a completely untrustworthy organization.

Re:so close

[steveha]

Long term, Tesla will face a serious issue with their build costs. That's where the majors will clean their clocks. They know how to run the supply chain, drive costs down on volume and build cars accurately and quickly. Tesla will struggle there too. Their margin for error is very small.

On the other hand, Tesla built their own battery factory, and they get all the batteries they need at the lowest possible cost. Battery cost is a huge chunk of the cost of an EV.

The Chevy Bolt is believed to sell at a $9000 loss per car; EV credits make up the difference. Chevy doesn't have a battery factory.

So will the new Mercedes EV be a low-volume car like the Bolt, profitable mainly due to EV credits? For it to really hurt Tesla, Mercedes would have to be able to undercut Tesla on cost while still being profitable. This seems unlikely to me.

Also, it appears that Tesla has smoothed out the problems with the Model 3 factory. I expect them now to build one, or even two, additional factories (first one in China, second one in Europe) to make batteries and cars. If Tesla gets three factories going, building 5000 cars per week at each factory, and making USD$10000 per car... that would be quite a revenue stream. And Tesla can get there faster than Mercedes or any other legacy car maker can.

Tesla could have been strangled in its crib when it was a baby. I think it's too late now and Tesla is going to be huge.

Re:so close

[AmiMoJo]

The other big quality issue with Tesla that rarely gets mentioned is beta software.

Because they can do OTA updates they release cars half finished and promise to release basic features later, but then never do. It's as bad as game developers.

For example, take speed sensitive volume control. Very basic feature that has been standard on car stereos for what, 20 years now? Tesla promised it years ago, even got as far as making the check box for it visible but it didn't work properly, and last time I checked that box had gone away again.

And now other manufacturers are getting the same idea. The Jaguar iPace launched with unfinished software and all the fanboys are complaining about early reviews that didn't wait for the promised big update that will fix everything.

Re:so close

[hackertourist]

Mercedes all said they are just getting start and aren't dedicating a factory because they don't want to over-commit to the market.

They aren't dedicating a factory because they don't need to. They've got an assembly line that's flexible enough to produce two very different vehicles in an arbitrary ratio. This is a superior solution to a dedicated production line.
And they can roll out this flexibility to other assembly lines when those are tooled up for new vehicles, so in a few years they'll be able to do half their total production as EVs. Make no mistake, Mercedes may just be getting started, but this won't be a tentative, small-scale effort. A $12B investment is huge.

Re: so close

[Anonymous Coward]

[citation needed]

Re: so close

[hackertourist]

Citation

The vehicle will be produced on the same line as the company's C-Class Saloon and Estate, GLC and GLC Coupe. ...
"Our decision to produce electric vehicles on the same line as models with combustion engines enables us to respond flexibly to demand and use plant capacity to best effect.

In case you don't realize, the GLC and C-class are related, but rather different vehicles (completely different body, lots of commonality internally). The $12B figure is from TFA.

Re:so close

[bobbied]

Tesla will likely end up on the ash heap of history with Delorian. But there is a chance they make it on their own, a very slim chance. But the odds where always stacked this way for Tesla. My guess is that they won't make it, but it's going to be fun to watch them try. It won't all be a waste, Tesla has advanced the state of the art in ways the majors couldn't and I'm going to bet that whomever snaps them up as they die will get a treasure trove of new things.

My guess is Tesla gets purchased by one of the majors, or hits bankruptcy and pieces get purchased by many of the majors. In the end, Tesla will have advanced the state of the art greatly, and the brand name will live on, but the company will not exist anymore. But that's how the odds where stacked when this whole idea got started.

Re:so close

[froggyjojodaddy]

A lot of people get confused over this. Back in the 1990's (maybe 80's..), Mercedes Benz was the benchmark for reliability and technology. They made airbags and ABS popular and everyone kept an eye on the S-Class because it was their launchpad for ground breaking technology that would later work it's way down into their cheaper models.

Their diesel engines were especially renowned for longevity and practically every model was over-engineered. Fast forward a decade and they started cutting costs where it matters (engineering, manufacturing, materials). Where they previously used steel or aluminium, they now use plastic. Their doors previously shut like a bank vault, now they sound tinny and hollow. A Mercedes was supposed to last you 10 years+. Now you're lucky if you get 4 before something major breaks.

MB still relies on the myth of their 'hewn from granite' motto from the 80's/90's but that's not been true for a long, long time. I wouldn't trust an EV Mercedes, especially one using an existing platform and just made to be EV at all

Re:so close

[Anonymous Coward]

Long term, Tesla will face a serious issue with their build costs. That's where the majors will clean their clocks. They know how to run the supply chain, drive costs down on volume and build cars accurately and quickly. Tesla will struggle there too. Their margin for error is very small.

Not true. Munro & Associates said the Model 3 production costs are lower than any other manufacturer could pull off today. You have to remember the major automakers don't actually build cars - they assemble them. Virtually everything has been outsourced to suppliers who have their own shareholders to please. So you end up with cars that have poorly integrated & overpriced components thrown together wherever the automaker can find space. Just compare the integrated, holistic design of the Model 3 (Munro called it a "symphony of engineering") vs. the Chevy Bolt, where GM threw third-party boxes wherever their CAD program said they'd fit. Tesla did right to keep everything in house where it made sense, especially batteries and powertrains. Not only are their EV production costs (battery, inverter, motor, controller) almost certainly the lowest in the business, everything packages together seamlessly.

Re:so close

[Anonymous Coward]

I understand why you would have the impression that Tesla could plausibly go bankrupt given how the media mischaracterizes practically everything on the subject. But you might want to look at Tesla's actual financials first. The 2Q earnings call was still in the red to be sure, but it also made it clear that they were ramped up for production and should be cash flow positive by end of year (guidance was for 3Q, but 4Q is the real test).

For a company that is "on the verge of bankruptcy" the seem to be doing pretty well. In 2Q the Model 3 was the best selling luxury sedan -- and that was with Tesla holding back sales to extend the tax benefit another quarter. That's right, not only is the Model 3 the best selling EV (by a large margin) it was also the best selling luxury sedan including conventional cars (ICE).

They also had >2 billion in cash with 1 billion in liabilities due early next year. All while they are set to be pulling in more and more money.

With a market cap in the same range as Ford, GM, Daimler -- deserved or not it is hard to see a hostile takeover succeed. I doubt even Toyota could afford it.

Sure, maybe Tesla will fail as you expect. And it doesn't sound like you have any particular concern whether they succeed or fail so maybe there's no point to bringing any of this up. But in terms of your prognostication, you might want to check Tesla's financial disclosures and see how they fit in the market before assuming they are doomed.

Re:so close

[Anonymous Coward]

tesla's ability to succeed hinges on their ceo. If the board members can get him to settle down, stop pulling himself in a million directions and focus on the company then they will succeed.

You talk about battery factories, but really how hard would it be for any other major auto company to follow tesla's lead in setting up their own. Remember that Tesla's battery factories started off as a partnership with an already experienced battery manufacturer. If the VAG or MB decide to do the same they will jump in front of Tesla quite efficiently as they already have many decades of supply chain management under their belts.

"For it to really hurt Tesla, Mercedes would have to be able to undercut Tesla on cost while still being profitable."

Incorrect! Mercedes has years of pedigree to rely on when asking for a higher price, sure their reliability might be BS during certain decades but most consumers tend to follow their family when considering large purchases such as a car. If someones entire family has driven MB's cars then they are more likely to get a MB than to switch to something else. If Mercedes can come close to being competitive with Tesla on most major stats then you can bet that pedigree will allow them to charge just that bit extra.

"Also, it appears that Tesla has smoothed out the problems with the Model 3 factory."

coming from the automotive manufacturing world, i can assure you that no manufacturer ever sorts out all of the issues in a factory as it is more about change management than solving problems. The majors have decades of experience in this, come talk to us after tesla has started their first major face-lift/generational change and we will see how many problems pop right back up again. This isnt a design it once and keep building the same thing industry, it goes in cycles and if Tesla cant manage the generational change over of the model S and then X and then 3 as they come up then they wont be as huge as you think they will be (also note that they are supposed to be making another roadster too.

Dont get me wrong, i would like to see Tesla succeed but i think at the moment it is better to take the pragmatic wait and see approach before making any claims as to who will come out on top. After-all, one more competitor in the market is never a bad thing but don't go expecting Tesla to go eating Mercedes lunch or running any of the major manufacturers out of business.

Re:so close

[q_e_t]

What is the margin on wholesale batteries, and what proportion of cost? Owning a battery factory might be a 1% saving on overall vost or 10%.

And Tesla can get there faster than Mercedes or any other legacy car maker can.

The majors have a lot of revenue to throw at it, so it's not a given. And a lot od car building experience. If push came to shove my money would be on the majors. VW just absorbed a huge fine and barely blinked, that's how much power the majors have.

Re:so close

[steveha]

I'm not sure what the margin is, but I found a recent article on how much it costs Tesla: about $100 per kWh for cells, and "within two years" they hope to be under $100 per kWh for finished battery packs.

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/06/09/100-kwh-tesla-battery-cells-this-year-100-kwh-tesla-battery-packs-in-2020/

I also found a 2017 article where Audi claims to be paying around 100 Euros (about $114) for one kWh of battery cells. This is a much lower price than I expected. And, a year ago? How is Audi doing that?

https://electrek.co/2017/06/28/audi-electric-car-battery-cost/

The majors have a lot of revenue to throw at it

Yeah, but the majors may find that there isn't enough capacity on the market to make mass quantities of battery cells. Tesla's GigaFactory now makes over half of all EV battery cells, and only Tesla gets those.

I think Audi is planning to sell in Model S quantities, not Model 3 quantities.

Re:so close

[q_e_t]

A Tesla is about 75kwH or thereabouts, so Audi's batteries (assuming the same approximate capacity) add an additional $1000 to costs. So assuming $50k retail, it's maybe $30,000 to build (retail being 30k, plus manufacturer's profit, transport cost, dealer's profit), so $1000 is 3%. It's within my really handwavy estimate :). 3% isn't a huge margin for Tesla to have over Audi.

Re:so close

[bobbied]

I never said they where doomed, only that they where out of time and room for error. Everything must go right for them now. No more mistakes or missteps can be made.

Promises have been made in the past which have not been kept. Tesla needs to start keeping promises, the factory simply has to start turning out cars at a profit. So far, standing up the factory has been taking longer and costing more than expected with production well under target. But getting production on track will NOT be enough to ensure their success.

Tesla is now starting to face competition in their luxury market space from the Majors. If they prove there is money to be made there, you can bet the majors will jump into the space. I hear that Tesla's has little room to lower prices, because their build costs are high, so the majors can sink them on cost to price if they want to. If there is money to be made, you can bet they will try to sink Tesla and Tesla will be powerless to resist. If that happens, bankruptcy and selling off parts of the company will be forced. If there isn't enough money in the space to interest the majors, Tesla will face starvation if they are too big to be sustained by the cars they can sell.

So, Tesla may make it, but the odds are stacked to make this unlikely. The road to success is very narrow now. There are a million ways they fail, and only a handful where they succeed.

IF they fail, the majors will just buy up the technology from the creditors for pennies on the dollar.

Re:so close

[bobbied]

The majors can out spend them and out design and build them in short order. Tesla needs more production cost reductions or some kind of differentiator that can translate in to profits. Wiz Bang features are nice, but expensive.

The problem for Tesla is the majors can afford to pound them if there is money to be made in Tesla's market. So if Tesla makes too much, they are going to get attacked, if they don't make enough, they will wither and die. The range for success is very narrow.

Re:so close

[Waccoon]

Tesla knows very well they will die if they leave the luxury market. What separates them from all the other EV vendors is the endless hype, controversy, publicity stunts, and (dare I say it) whining. If they made normal cars, then good ol' economic reality rears its ugly head.

Personally, I think this is the real reason the Model 3 is selling for almost double the price they promised, and they're only working on pricier, more luxurious versions before they get cheaper. It was never meant to be a mainstream car.

Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

When the sleeping giants awake, and they have the best engineers in the world working for them, Elon Musk is going to be schooled well beyond his worst nightmares.

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

As much as I dislike Elon Musk, we're talking about "sleeping giants" working on a completely new technology for them all with products with details still marked "TBA". For all the criticism of Tesla being all talk and no action, at least they actually, you know, have real cars on the market and on the road. I've heard "we're releasing electric cars" from the big manufacturers time and time again, they seem to have a big problem with follow-through. But you know what? I hope that they do. From the customers perspective, it's win/win.

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet he pushed them into the market by forcing them to copy his lead or risk being left behind. You can thank him for that, or you can pander to #exhaustgate frauds who failed to innovate and cheated instead. Tesla was a big experiment.

Where Musk himself lost integrity and cut corners and lied about it is where his failure will be judged, not in the engineering of his product which is actually formidable considering the obstacles to entry. You're just validating the establishment.
It's not unexpected.

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[ItsJustAPseudonym]

Tesla will be as AMD, while Mercedes will be as Intel.

Still a good thing for consumers.

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[galabar]

The do know how to build a lot of cars, though...

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

As much as I dislike Elon Musk, we're talking about "sleeping giants" working on a completely new technology for them

Yeah, that must be why Mercedes is in last place in the Formula 1 championship.

Oh wait, they are winning. How could they do that if they have no experience in the technology ?

Maybe because they are not "new" to the technology like you mistakenly believe.

You're a stupid shit and you have NO idea what you are talking about. In other words you are a typical Slashdot user !

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[avandesande]

they will however be able to design an interior that doesn't look like it was designed by a child

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla is already comparable to Intel. They are way ahead.

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[WindBourne]

LOL.
Tesla is blowing the doors off all other car makers, according to Munuro.
And it is the 'sleeping giants' that are being schooled.
Sadly, I predict that in another 2-3 years that many, if not most, of them will be begging for gov money.

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[hey!]

I'm not sure that cars were ever really the focus. I don't think Musk wants to be Henry Ford. He wants to be John D. Rockefeller.

Anyhow, no giants have been sleeping. The time hasn't been right for them, and now they're probably moving a little faster because the right time would be too late.

Re: Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Last time I checked, the Mercedes F1 driver was booed for slowing the competition. Perhaps the production autopilot will be programmed to drive really slowly in front of their competitors? Oh, and maybe it'll be an ICE hybrid too and not fully electric? Retard.

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla is blowing the doors off all other car makers, according to Munuro.

Source citation?
The closest I could find was Munro slagging the Tesla Model 3 as having the build quality of a Kia from the 1990s (forward to 06:55)
WindBourne you had said you have a Tesla Model S, your other car is a Kia right?

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[ItsJustAPseudonym]

Currently, yes. However, I am thinking back to when when AMD dragged the x86 processor vendors kicking and screaming to 64-bit architectures. Likewise, Tesla is now dragging car makers to electric.

I think the big car makers are now going to adopt electric, and they are going to catch Tesla. Only time will tell if Tesla can stay ahead. I wish them well, though.

Re: Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

And how is Tesla doing in all those F1 competitions? Oops...

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

You must have not watched very carefully. You not only misremembered the name, but also the report. Munro, an experienced *car mechanic* said "Tesla is a shitty car". And then added "with great electronics". This is really nothing near to "Tesla is blowing the doors off".

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, in five years you'll be buying a Mercedes with a badge that says "powered by Tesla" or maybe "Tesla inside"

Re:Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

And yet he pushed them into the market by forcing them to copy his lead or risk being left behind.

-

You obviously do not know much about the car industry.

GM was working on electric cars when Musk was still a child.

Honda was working on fuel cell - powered cars years ago too.

You're late to the party and your knowledge is very weak.

Re: Tesla will not exist much longer.

[Anonymous Coward]

How is Ford and GM doing? Audi? Lamborghini? Porsche? Original point stands, Mercedes has no experience with large scale manufacture of EVs. That they have a hybrid F1 isn't even an argument, except maybe one for contraception.

Musk missed the window

[Anonymous Coward]

Needed to be producing $30-35k vehicles by the thousands each week. Needed people to be able to order one and take delivery within a max of 2-3 months.

Right now Tesla is for aficionados not the everyman.

Game over

Re:Musk missed the window

[bobbied]

Game over

Ah, not so fast. Where I don't think this is great news for Tesla, and I agree Tesla has been spinning it's wheels getting manufacturing up to speed, They are far from done. They are rapidly running out of maneuvering room as the majors start to take Tesla seriously enough to market similarly equipped all electrics at similar price points, so they need to get that factory running, w/o any more delays or they will be done. BUT they are not done.

I give Tesla less than a 50% chance of making it long term and I'm worried about how Musk is acting right now. Their problems are stacking up and we are still in the mode where the pile is getting higher as they move forward, but if they can start working the issues faster than they find them, there is still a chance.

Re:Musk missed the window

[Anonymous Coward]

Now we can short Mercedez stock too!

Re: Musk missed the window

[that this is not und]

Nah, Mercedes isn't a one shot wonder.

Re:Musk missed the window

[Mr. Dollar Ton]

Tesla had one chance to pull through, and it was to replace the loudmouth with a real manager with auto experience years ago, before they spent a fortune building a non-working "automated factory" that they had to write off and rebuild. Oh, and before Musk spent untold billions on bailing out his other fad business instead on making cars.

Too late now, the company has no credibility, no obvious advantage, a mountain of debt, and production numbers that don't indicate it will be able to service it. Those longs who sold at $320 were the lucky ones, Switzerland announcement or no Switzerland announcement.

Re:Musk missed the window

[AmiMoJo]

The main issues for Tesla now are price and quality. The Model X is an impressive car, but they can't build them consistently. I've never seen one that didn't have poor door alignment or ridiculous panel gaps. Not to mention the amount of service centre visits people are having to make.

For that reason alone the Jaguar iPace and this new Mercedes will be popular with people who want a car built to a high standard. With those brands you know it's going to be perfect, and they won't tell you "sorry 10mm misalignment of the door trim is normal".

The price problem is at the lower end. The Model 3 was supposed to be affordable at $35,000, but they have been beaten to that market segment by Hyundai and Kia, and very soon Nissan. They all make cheaper long range EVs with a higher spec than the base Model 3 will have when it eventually launches. Range in particular is a big deal because the $35k version has a 40% smaller battery than those other cars and yet costs more.

I don't think that's a big issue right now for Tesla, they will just keep serving the $50-70k market, but in the longer term their plan seems to be to go for the super high volume affordable end.

Re:Musk missed the window

[houghi]

All companies fail if you wait long enough. Looking at the bigger picture, I see Tesla as the initiator that shakes up the car industry. It forces others to action by showing it is possible.

Now the others can't say "But that kind of range is not possible with batteries." because the whole world will say "Bullshit!"

And you know that car companies would do that, as they have done it in the past.

Fake grille? 180km/h top speed limit? What about a

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi,

what's with the fake grille - was that really necessary?

180km/h speed limit in a 70000â car? I doubt German customers will accept that. Tesla doesn't have that limit.

Is there a clear upgrade path to autonomous driving in this vehicle (no matter how many years it takes - will I be able to upgrade)?

Re: Cue Elon

[Anonymous Coward]

Mercedes is a bunch of pedos!

I am going public at $420.69 a share!

Where is my ambien!

The Apple insanity avalance?

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks like the Apple insanity avalanche all over again. Just maybe (hopefully) without the insanity part.

Somebody presenting a "revolutionary" (read: hyped by and for the clueless) design, and everybody and their dog stopping any innovation of their own, to run behind that somebody. No matter how misguided or insane (hence insanity). All that matters it that he's confident and acts like a leader. At least he's actually going his own way, which everyone was too pussy to do, for fear of failing.

I don't think Tesla cars are as total shit as Apple products and their livestock^Wusers are. But Musk is even more of an overly confident creepy "uncanny valley" psycho with a God complex.

And you can bet the imitations will get it wrong, and will continue to do so, until their wrong becomes the new normal and right. Just like with iDevices.

Error in the ./ Summary

[Jodka]

from the ./ summary:

The Model X has a range of 237 miles.

from wikipedia

The Tesla Model X 100D has an official EPA rated range of up to 295 mi (475 km).

So the summary incorrectly states that the Mercedes EQC has a greater range (280 miles) than the Tesla Model X, when in fact the Mercedes has the lesser range.

There are different standards for measurement for electrical vehicle range, so it's not clear if the figures are comparable. Nonetheless, the value given appears either outdated or otherwise in error.
 

Re:Error in the ./ Summary

[Anonymous Coward]

There are other models than the 100D. Also, the symmary comes directly from the article, including supporting evidence in a table:

"The new EQC -- roughly the size of the brand’s popular GLC SUV -- features a range of more than 450 kilometers (280 miles) and accelerates to 100 kilometers per hour (62 mph) in as little as 5.1 seconds. The Model X has a range of 237 miles.

Further, the Wikipedia article links to this page (as footnote #6), which lists the mileage at less than 280: https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=36979&id=36980

Re:Error in the ./ Summary

[R3d M3rcury]

The Model X 75D has a range of 237 miles and has a starting price of $79,500. Prices were not announced on the EQC, though the rumor mill is putting it at around $55,000.

Re:Error in the ./ Summary

[AmiMoJo]

It looks like they compared the Model X that is closest in price to the Mercedes. Of course if you are willing to pay a lot more you can get a little bit extra range.

No, it is number two, right after looks.

[Anonymous Coward]

Because it's all about bragging. And for that, acceleration is king. Nearly as much as bling-bling.

Re: Fake grille? 180km/h top speed limit? What abo

[Anonymous Coward]

Every car should be upgradable regardless of the fuel.

Not likely.

[WindBourne]

Yeah. The same company that is one of a number that CONTINUES to cheat at CO2, is supposed to be believed that they will take on Tesla. Anybody believing that, is kidding themselves.

The sad thing here, is that Europe, esp. Germany, love to scream about cutting CO2, but, like China, they are lying through their teeth. Sad really. We need all nations to quit trying to cheat the corners and just keep dropping their CO2. UK did a good job of dropping theirs. That is a good model to follow.

As to this model, I give it little chance. In particular, they do not have good enough electric network to succeed.

Re:Not likely.

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla failed to meet production goals again. And musk will soon be getting ass raped in prison for securities fraud.

Re:Not likely.

[bobbied]

Tesla failed to meet production goals again. And musk will soon be getting ass raped in prison for securities fraud.

It was the Ambien and the SEC doesn't send you to the maximum security part of the system where such things happen. Especially in this case. Musk broke the rules by talking when he should have kept quiet. If he didn't tip somebody to what he was going to say and didn't make a personal profit on this, the SEC isn't going to toss him in the pokey. He was just shooting off his mouth in public, about stuff he should have kept quiet about, you don't go to jail for that. They may fine Tesla and/or Musk for his stupid talking out of turn and not though official channels, but I don't think they will go past that.

Unless he tried to lie to the SEC about it or cover it up, he's going to get a fine at most.

Re:Not likely.

[Anonymous Coward]

You may be shocked to discover that there are several class action lawsuits filed which could have a material effect on the bottom line. Given all the other stresses on Tesla's finances, the last thing they need is class actions to further crunch their cash position.

Re:Not likely.

[CaffeinatedBacon]

several class action lawsuits

Those things take years. Tesla will either be very profitable by then, or sold to a competitor. It won't make a difference either way.

Re:Not likely.

[CaffeinatedBacon]

The only people who scream about cutting CO2 are the ones like you. The very same people who continue per person to emit much more than either Europe or China.

Re:Not likely.

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? The government doesn't punish you when you break the law because you're in an altered state of mind caused by a legal but controlled substance? I'll left everybody with a DUI know that they have nothing to worry about.

How do they plan to recharge?

[quantaman]

If they use Telsa's supercharger network that's great news for Tesla.

But if they and other manufacturers decide to share their own standard for charging stations (open or otherwise) then Tesla might be in major trouble.

Re:How do they plan to recharge?

[WindBourne]

Try this. Make sure that Tesla and Level 2 are off.
Now, do it with just Tesla.
What do you see? The fact is, that you can not go across the country using CCS, CHademo, AND Level 2. It is only Tesla that allows you to drive around most of the nation.

All in all, unless these companies spend billions just in America, they will get nowhere.

Re: How do they plan to recharge?

[that this is not und]

The other companies have a century of a symbiotic relationship with the huge network of petroleum fuel station owners. They don't need to build their own infrastructure because they don't view it as their objective to put gas stations out of business. Two or three charging stations at many of the existing gas stations sounds pretty good, and also much less expensive to roll out.

Re:How do they plan to recharge?

[chispito]

All in all, unless these companies spend billions just in America, they will get nowhere.

It is only Tesla that allows you to drive around most of the nation.

If you can afford a Mercedes EV you can afford to use your other car for long car trips. Or rent a car.

Re:How do they plan to recharge?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or fly first class.

Re:How do they plan to recharge?

[quantaman]

What do you see? The fact is, that you can not go across the country using CCS, CHademo, AND Level 2.
It is only Tesla that allows you to drive around most of the nation.

"most of the nation" is pretty crappy coverage when you're talking about an automobile. Most people don't want to include the location of charging stations when planning for a road trip.

All in all, unless these companies spend billions just in America, they will get nowhere.

RTFM is one thing... but RTFHL?

Mercedes-Benz, not exactly the biggest manufacturer out there, is investing $12 billion, you really think they can't build out/subsidize a charging network?

Re:How do they plan to recharge?

[CaffeinatedBacon]

If EV's take off in a big way like expected. Who in their right mind thinks the charging network won't also grow?

Re:How do they plan to recharge?

[WindBourne]

that is true. BUT, most ppl get used to a car and want that one.

I suspect that this car will sell in the same way that S/X did. That is, low numbers until a network was fairly well developed.

Re:How do they plan to recharge?

[WindBourne]

what is Daimler investing that money into? A battery factory, and a little bit goes to their network. VERY little bit.

Re:How do they plan to recharge?

[quantaman]

what is Daimler investing that money into? A battery factory, and a little bit goes to their network. VERY little bit.

So what? Once they build all those cars do you expect them to simply forget that their cars need somewhere to recharge? Telsa can't count on their competition being inexplicably stupid. If none of this first $12 billion isn't earmarked for charging stations then a bunch of the next $12 billion will be.

The big car companies are building electric cars and they have teams of very smart people trying to figure out their charging station strategy. They could still screw it up, but they're going to do something. And if Tesla isn't careful it could find itself on the outside looking in.

Re: How do they plan to recharge?

[WindBourne]

Considering that a Tesla works at any of these stations, I doubt that they will be outsiders.

Re: How do they plan to recharge?

[Anonymous Coward]

So for some inexplicable reason Tesla's will be allowed to charge at their stations, but their cars won't be allowed to charge at yours...

Re:How do they plan to recharge?

[dunkelfalke]

Then maybe America is not their primary market.

Re:How do they plan to recharge?

[q_e_t]

I would imagine that a European car likely to be mostly sold in Europe will use the existing significant European charging network.

Re: Cue Elon

[Anonymous Coward]

Call the SEC direct Elion, they can take care of you..

There Is No Alternative

[manu0601]

There is no alternative to betting on electric cars

While I tend to be favorable to electric cars (with some caution: where does the electricity comes from?), the "There Is No Alternative" mantra still lit a red light for me.

Re: There Is No Alternative

[that this is not und]

In Indiana, 75% of the electricity comes from burning coal.

Re:There Is No Alternative

[rgmoore]

I think you're misreading what they're saying. They're talking about possibilities, not certainties. Electric cars may be the wave of the future, and car companies need to position themselves to be ready to deal with that potential future. If they don't take a gamble on electric cars now, they'll be out of business if/when they do take over.

You can get some of that from their next statement, "and we're going all in". That means that a company can make a big bet or a small bet on electric, and Mercedes is excited enough about electric's future to make a big bet.

Re: There Is No Alternative

[Hamsterdan]

Yes, but even a coal plant is way more efficient than a ICE, thus less polluting than burning gasoline

Re: There Is No Alternative

[q_e_t]

Well-to-wheel versus mine-to-wheel, given various losses, it's about comparable efficiency, so that's not bad for something that effectively decouples transport from the mode of creation of energy. With renewables of nuclear, the footprint is better than ICE. When these hit the used market for a reasonable price, and assuming there is a battery uprade program like with Renault, I will be very tempted, partly because Mercedes has impressed me with the car I have currently sufficiently for me to want to go with another if the economics are there.

3D Print A Car?

[LifesABeach]

Some folks are working on some type of thin film solution for batteries. Interesting thing is these batteries are made using materials that are abundant. Charging batteries in a short amount of time is a major deal breaker. Rules for car manufacturing are known. So all that needs to be done is addressing the issue of designing a 3D Printer that can build the car. This is not a trivial challenge.

Crossovers

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I the only one who is really tired of crossovers? Making a sedan taller and less well-handling (and uglier) just to make it look like it has some ability to go off-road (which it doesn't). I get the use case for a large SUV if you can fit a third row of seating, piling in kids and their friends is useful. But small SUVs and crossovers are no bigger on the inside than the corresponding sedan, but are heavier and look like crap.

I don't get it. Now get off my lawn!

reality check

[Anonymous Coward]

Its nice another car company to investing into electric but how is companies with similar market cap suddenly going to be a threat to Tesla who is all in?
That drop in Tesla is overly reaction imo.

It's a win for Musk

[Anonymous Coward]

The whole point was to make good electric cars popular.

Hubris

[The_Other_Kelly]

Imagine an alternative world,
in which Elon Musk was capable of actually building a team who could execute his Vision, competently.

Because he clearly cannot.

Ego driven Drama has led to the ultimate humiliation ... being schooled by a hidebound, legacy company,
Mercedes! The home of Bland ... who are still
able to deploy and deliver better and faster than
the "Start-up".

Management build the Team.
The Team builds the Machine.
The Machine delivers the Product.

Who is failing here?
Who else can it be?

Elon-chu ... I name you.

Actually the 280 range of the EQC....

[Ecuador]

Actually the 280 range of the EQC is apparently not an EPA standard measurement, so it is not even comparable. The 100D you mention is the "high end" for the tesla, but even the 75D model X has 237 miles or range, when the EQC might not have much more than 200: https://jalopnik.com/the-2020-...

It seems that their range was too short, so they sort of fudged the numbers a bit to make it sound better? Not sure what this NEDC measurement is, but it apparently gives the Tesla Model X 100D a 351 range!

Re:Actually the 280 range of the EQC....

[mlyle]

> It seems that their range was too short, so they sort of fudged the numbers a bit to make it sound better?

"New European Drive Cycle" -- aka the measurement standard used by the European Union. It is not surprising that a European automaker would choose to report NEDC numbers-- though of course these are being replaced with WLTP (but WLTP gives a lower result than NEDC, so you don't want to report a WLTP number when your competition has reported NEDC).

Model X 75D has a NEDC of 259 miles, vs. 280 miles for the EQC-- so it's a bit better than the 75D and a fair bit worse than the 100D.

Re:Actually the 280 range of the EQC....

[Anonymous Coward]

actually, it is very surprising since it was replaced a year ago with WLTP with all new models since Aug 2017 being committed to using WLTP. In particular, Mercedes own page on the topic mentions that NEDC is not accurate. However, Mercedes apparently decided that to be competitive they needed to use the deprecrated NEDC.

Re:Actually the 280 range of the EQC....

[q_e_t]

If the price is decent, the range seems reasonable in comparison to the Teslas.

Shitty examples are shitty

[Anonymous Coward]

au contraire! You did, indeed, used to worry about what filling station had the "lead". Any time fuels have changed, there's been this same shake up. Your statement isn't bright, novel, or cute at all. As usual, you're a tard.

Re:Shitty examples are shitty

[fluffernutter]

For one thing, I wasn't making a play on words. I meant 'lead' as in ahead. As in, I don't want to worry about where I spend a half-hour of my time every 300 miles. For another thing, I was very young when the unleaded switch happened, but I don't remember many problems and I definitely remember a lot more gas stations.

Re:Shitty examples are shitty

[Barsteward]

you can go 300 miles without a bladder break? You have to change the way you approach "filling up" with EVs. You never let it go to 0 and then charge to 100%. Just plug it in during your bladder/tea breaks so you car is doing something useful rather than sitting in a car park doing nothing.

Re:Shitty examples are shitty

[Anonymous Coward]

As somebody who drives from CO to visit family in CA, I can typically do 400 miles without the need for a bladder break. And typically a bladder break takes about 2 minutes. About the time it takes to fill the tank.

Re:Shitty examples are shitty

[Anonymous Coward]

you can go 300 miles without a bladder break?

Well Edmunds.com did a across America record attempt (2013 Tesla Model S P85) and could only eke out ~200 miles on a full charge, and with their time saving just enough charging strategy, still required 1.0 hour of charging for every 3.50 hours of driving.

So barsteward, your idea of a road trip involves a 3 hours drive (200 miles tops), followed by a 1 hour bladder break?
I'm no doctor, but I would suggest get your bladder some medical attention, especially if you intend to drive gasoline cars where 5 minute bladder breaks are the norm.

Re:Shitty examples are shitty

[apoc.famine]

I was very young when the unleaded switch happened, but I don't remember....

yeah, mental issues are one of the side effects of lead poisoning.....

Normally I would buy American

[Crashmarik]

But I have such a tremendous dislike of the people that support Musk I think I'll put aside my distaste for people tried to exterminate my relatives and take a serious look at their product for the first time in 50 years.

Re:Normally I would buy American

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, that's an odd dislike. It's not Musk you dislike, but people who support him? Why?

Looks like another ~$80k car

[Anonymous Coward]

Wake me up when they start making electric cars for the rest of the world... you know the 99% who will never have 80k to spend on a car.

I prefer Merc to Telsa

[Harlequin80]

I currently own 2 merceders a C200 and an E220D. One of my best mates owns a Tesla S.

The Tesla is really nice. And goes incredibly quick. But for me it doesn't tick the right boxes for me to spend that amount of money on.

I totally get that it is personal taste, but I'm not a fan of the interior of the tesla. It doesn't feel as nice as my E. And while the tesla wieghs more than my E it doesn't have the same solid feel inside. Stupid example is the sound the doors make when you close them. Also, once you get over the geeky "thats so cool" response to the massive screen in the tesla I'm not a fan of it.

Acceleration isn't a thing for me. Cars have never really been about performance, I have motorcycles for that.

One thing that my mate owning a tesla has done is totally remove any range concern about owning an electric I might have had. Sure my E will do over 1000km on a tank. But his tesla has a full tank every morning. The 30km each way commute to the city just isn't a cause for concern. Also our state govt has built a network of charging stations along the primary highway network.

For me an electric car in the same category as the Mercedes E class would be hugely compelling.

Musk went nuts

[110010001000]

Musk is now calling the hero cave explorer who helped rescue the Thai kids a "child rapist". https://www.buzzfeednews.com/a...

Tesla may not be around much longer.

Re:Musk went nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

Although this is sort of a separate point, that guy isn't a diver.. and it's kind of worrisome to me that journalists are almost exclusively copying other stories instead of going to an actual source. The guy is a cave explorer (on foot) who was familiar with that cave. He also gave an accurate prediction of where the kids would probably be camping out, and my understanding is that he helped contact outside experts. The only publication that I saw bother to dig a bit and specify that he's a cave explorer was The Sun (a great shock to me, since they're generally terrible) - and they went through the trouble of specifically clarifying that he is not a cave diver as reported elsewhere.

Re:Musk went nuts

[froggyjojodaddy]

Kinda weird that you keep posting the same thing every time Tesla is bought up. I count at least 3 different threads where you've said pretty much the same thing. Almost as if you had an agenda..

Re:Musk went nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, it is kinda weird that Musk will not let it die, although it looks there is a very small possibility it being true. Almost as if Musk has an agenda. As for you, you're just a stupid shill.

Re:Musk went nuts

[froggyjojodaddy]

Thanks AC. I'm not quite sure how you figure me as a shill since I have no shares, financial interest, or products of Tesla or any other company Musk is involved with. I like what Tesla is doing in terms of their products and I guess I am very much in favour of EVs. If that alone makes me a shill, I guess we need to update the definition!

Also, I do kinda like how Elon talks in interviews. It's refreshing. Sure, he says some unconventional stuff and, as a CEO, he really shouldn't be doing drugs and tweeting (is that true? I dunno) but on the whole, I'd rather listen to him talk rather than Jeff Bezos or some other CEO of Ford, GM etc.

Belly flop

[kamapuaa]

The actual range (by US standards) is "up to 200 miles." While I think range is over-emphasized with electric cars, that is in fact worse than the X.

It seems to be an electricized version of the GLC, which is a tiny SUV (well, I couldn't fit in one) selling for $40K. The EQC is going to cost twice as much as the GLC, in which case what's the point? Electric cars drive better and cost less to run/maintain, but doubling the cost is too much. It's also within striking range of the price of a Model X, which is a larger and better car.

It's not coming out for two more years, by which time Tesla (and surely a few other companies) will probably have compact SUVs that are better for cheaper.

In short, this car seems like a massive disappointment. Between the etron, the EQC, and the iX3, the German car companies are flopping electric cars and flopping them hard. They're all just over-priced re-workings of compact SUVs selling, to be sold for just $10K less than the clearly superior Tesla X.

Re:Belly flop

[mlyle]

Model X 75D has a NEDC-measured range of 259 miles, vs. 280 miles for the EQC-- so it's a bit better than the 75D and a fair bit worse than the 100D.

Wait a year.

[Anonymous Coward]

Problem with Tesla is the same as that which killed all USA auto manufacturers. Crap quality, and cheap garbage out of sight under the shiny exterior. People will buy the German and Japanese equivalents as they will be better designed, have better running gear, and will just work - exactly like the generations of ICE autos they sold before. And they won't be made in a tent by hordes of under-educated workers.

Eating Tesla's lunch

[Anonymous Coward]

But electric cars ars still just a fad.

Re:Eating Tesla's lunch

[DontBeAMoran]

Yeah, just like that Internet thing.

Who is Munuro?

[Latent Heat]

Is that the gimpy old dude in Fukuoka who can no longer grab a recessed door handle and does "tear downs" of cars and sells the report of what he finds for a lot of money?

Re:Who is Munuro?

[WindBourne]

That gimpy old dude does exactly that, and knows a great deal about vehicles.

lol EarthQuake Commission

[Anonymous Coward]

We won't be buying it here in New Zealand if it's called the EQC...

Not nearly enough

[SuperKendall]

Gas stations can just add a charging station or two. Which is a lot cheaper than what Tesla has done.

And how is a 60k+ Mercedes owner going to feel when both spots are filled or (more likely) one or more is broken because they are a side addition to the gas station?

Mixing charging stations into gas stations is a terrible idea because it will serve no-one well at all. Because even rapid charging takes quite a lot longer than a gas tank refill you need way more charging stations than you would pumps, not just one or two - even Tesla owners today run into waits at supercharger stations.

There is no getting around the need to build all new high end charging facilities, especially if you are producing a luxury car. A luxury electric car means charging becomes part of the experience you have to deliver on, since the customer cannot do much themselves beyond very slow wall socket charging.

Re:Not nearly enough

[beanpoppa]

Electric car owners will find themselves at public charging stations infrequently. As an ICE owner, I have to refill at a gas station once a week. An electric car owner generally charges overnight at home, and only has to charge on the road occasionally when their trip is longer than 250 miles. Sure- if you're going to say "But I have a 300 mile trip every week!" then an electric car may not be for you. But you would be greatly in the minority.

Re:Not nearly enough

[Barsteward]

There are apps to show where the unused chargers are so they don't have to waste their time going to the wrong place. thats the beauty of the EV revolution, all sorts of useful apps are created.

Re:Not nearly enough

[shilly]

It's interesting to think how the numbers will play out:
- When and how fast will apartment block parking lots be retrofitted with chargers
- Will lamp-post charging become commonplace
- How often will people actually need to charge given average daily driving distance in the US is 30miles (which implies charging only once or twice a week on average)
- How common will workplace charging become
I'll bet there's teams of analysts at banks and management consultancies and automakers and energy companies who are doing tons of work on modelling all this right now

Re:Not nearly enough

[Anonymous Coward]

Bummer. Having to pay both for a 4G data plan and likely some kind of subscription to access the chargers and have some juice.
And you'll need a $700 iPhone if you don't want a Google. Hopefully the web is also an option so you can use a laptop with 4G.
I say this sucks balls that a computer and Internet in a car get mandatory. Even bus or train you can get paper schedules and show on time, or look them up on the Internet at home.

Re:Not nearly enough

[Anonymous Coward]

I do wonder where the justification for this comes from? Most people have problems managing to charge their phone at night, why would they manage to keep their car charged if the phone is too challenging?

Re:Not nearly enough

[tehcyder]

I do wonder where the justification for this comes from? Most people have problems managing to charge their phone at night, why would they manage to keep their car charged if the phone is too challenging?

Unless you are taking serious drugs or passing out from excess alcohol each night, charging your phone is really not an issue for most people.

Re:Not nearly enough

[Anonymous Coward]

Look to Norway, where new electric cars outsell ICE.

Most EV owners charge at home, most of the time. Cheaper, and the car is parked at night anyway - and that is when electricity is cheaper too.

So not much queues at the fast chargers. Those are used for the longer trips, and those with lots of long trips are the last to go electric.

Lamp-post charging is not going to happen. A lamp post can only support slow charging, not interesting away from home.

Many gas stations has a charger or two - because that is where people are used to stop. Perhaps eat some fast food while waiting for the charging. If the charger is filled, just drive to the next one. You usually have range enough to pass several.

Re:Not nearly enough

[shilly]

Um.

I know all about Norway. I know all about where EV owners charge. I know when fast and rapid chargers are used. I don't know why you think lampposts need to be fast charging, they're a solution for overnight charging for people who don't have off-street parking. I am well aware of how gas station chargers are distributed.

I think you are confusing me with someone who knows nothing about EV charging and is raising objections to it. I'm not. I know lots about it and I'm interested to see how factors such as those I listed out above affect the speed and density of infrastructure rollout. This isn't an easy thing to predict.

Re:Not nearly enough

[lsatenstein]

Electric car owners will find themselves at public charging stations infrequently. As an ICE owner, I have to refill at a gas station once a week. An electric car owner generally charges overnight at home, and only has to charge on the road occasionally when their trip is longer than 250 miles. Sure- if you're going to say "But I have a 300 mile trip every week!" then an electric car may not be for you. But you would be greatly in the minority.

The car could be for him if that once per week trip was done from a car rental agency.

Re:5.1 seconds? - Because I want to stop

[FeelGood314]

The breaking is regenerative. If you want to stop fast you need motors that can absorb energy. Breaking at 100km/h (62 mph) will give you far more energy than accelerating from zero. So any electric car that can do decent regenerative breaking at speeds above 100km/h is going to be able to do the reverse and accelerate from 0 to 100 in 5~6 seconds. The 5~6 seconds is really the coefficient of friction of the tires with the road limiting the acceleration.

well there not biased at all...

[Anonymous Coward]

*This article comes to us courtesy of EVANNEX (which also makes aftermarket Tesla accessories). Authored by Charles Morris.

Re:Fake grille? 180km/h top speed limit? What abou

[green1]

While it would be nice to be able to upgrade to fully autonomous, no Tesla currently produced is every going to be upgraded to fully autonomous, so that's somewhat of a red herring. Sure, I know they're selling it as such, but it's just another in an extremely long line of flat out lies from their marketing team. It is extremely include that they do not have the appropriate sensors to do full autonomy. No amount of software can fix their lack of sensors. These cars can't even properly so blind spot monitoring, and people think they'll be able to drive themselves?

Re:Fake grille? 180km/h top speed limit? What abou

[Jodka]

what's with the fake grille - was that really necessary?

Presumably it is a skeuomorph.

A skeuomorph is a derivative object that retains ornamental design cues (attributes) from structures that are inherent to the original. Examples include pottery embellished with imitation rivets reminiscent of similar pots made of metal and a software calendar that imitates the appearance of binding on a paper desk calendar.

Is it really an attack on Tesla?

[DontBeAMoran]

Didn't Elon say his goal was to push other car manufacturers to also build electric cars? I bet from his point of view, Mercedes aren't attacking Tesla, they're joining them.

Wrong gimpy old dude

[Latent Heat]

You are talking about Sandy Munro of Bloomfield Hills, MI.

I, along with the person I was responding to, are talking about Sayonara Munuro, City of Fukuoko, Fukuoko Prefecture, Japan.