Jaguar I-Pace Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
HI,
Pictures/data of Mercedes EQC400 4matic here:

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/104500/new-electric-mercedes-eqc-suv-revealed-with-280-mile-range-pictures

"The boot capacity of the EQC will be around 500 litres - about 70 litres less than the I-Pace's. Mercedes also says the car can tow up to 1,800kg - that's 700kg less than the similarly-sized GLC.

Technical details released so far state that the EQC has a pair of asynchronous motors, one on each axle, giving it four-wheel drive. The front unit is said to be focused on efficiency in low to medium loads, while the motor at the rear is designed to enhance the car's dynamism by boosting performance. Mercedes says the total output of the system is 300kW (402bhp) and peak torque is 765Nm, which is enough to take the 2,425kg EQC from 0-62mph in 5.1 seconds, and on to a limited top speed of 112mph.

The 80kWh battery pack, which weighs 650kg alone, gives the newcomer a range of around 450km, or 280 miles, on the forthcoming, tougher WLTP test cycle. The model has an onboard 7.4kW charger for AC charging and all EQCs will get DC charging as standard; Mercedes claims this faster configuration will allow the car to be taken from 10 per cent to 80 per cent of charge in around 40 minutes.
"

Prices (expected) in high sixties!!!

Cheers,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
So EQC is slower, more cramped/less load space, more expensive and less efficient than i-Pace. Glad my Jag order is in.

The quoted range by the way is NEDC, not WLTP - it's expected to get 200miles from its 80kw when converted to WLTP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
The article mentions a WLTP range, not a NEDC. I like the big screen and the rounder back. And that is about it. I-Pace has 656 litres trunk I thought. Interesting that it also does not have more than 7,4 kWh A-C load capacity. So also 1 Phase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,513 Posts
catwoman said:
Thomas reviews the EQC
Not really getting excited about the EQC and start wondering why it takes Mercedes so long to get their BEV launched, certainly for NL they missed out on 2018 company car demand which is now just between Tesla and Jaguar.
 
G

·
Ooooops Stylisticly! EQC side-profile is a bit "homage to F/E/I-Pace", but front and back are very poor. I am sure it will be very successful, but they could have done better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
DrPhil said:
The article mentions a WLTP range, not a NEDC. I like the big screen and the rounder back. And that is about it. I-Pace has 656 litres trunk I thought. Interesting that it also does not have more than 7,4 kWh A-C load capacity. So also 1 Phase.
The article is mistaken. The Verge, Telegraph, Wired and many more sources now all agree on 200 miles range now, WLTP. Even the big screen at the reveal stated combined consumption of 22.2kW/100km, so 220miles range from an 80kW battery.

This is a deeply and embarrassingly poor first attempt at an EV and the gathered audience were actually very subdued in their reaction when the cars were brought on stage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,513 Posts
What is interesting is the ratio of battery size and range - the smallest battery has highest range WLTP???. I added Kona and Tesla for reference.
Mercedes 500km range with a 70kW battery = 7.14km/kW
I-pace 470km range with a 90kW battery = 5.22km/kW
Etron 400km range with a 95kW battery = 4.21km/kW
Kona 482km range with a 64kW battery = 7.53km/kW
MS 75D 441km range (90% of NEDC) with a 75kW battery = 5.88km/kW
MX 75D 375km range (90% of NEDC) with a 75kW battery = 5.00km/kW
I posted this earlier but EQC is certainly not delivering - it has 10kWmore battery but 100km less range and that is only in "Max range" mode.
Earlier: Mercedes 500km range with a 70kW battery = 7.14km/kW
Now: Mercedes 400km range with a 80kW battery = 5.00km/kW

Which puts is ahead of E-tron but behind I-pace and on par with Tesla MX.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Tophe74 said:
Except that the Mercedes is 450km WLTP not 500 and the battery is 80kw. So not so far from I pace in km/wh.
Look again at the global reveal and in particular, the figures at the bottom of the massive screen on stage. Quite clearly says that official consumption of EQC is 22.2kW/100km. That is 4.5km per kilowatt of battery used. Way down on other BEVs and on a par with my A3 e-tron, which has a petrol lump to carry around, as well as a motor and battery pack.

This is a deeply poor stab at making a BEV from a mainstream manufacturer and as well as Mercedes being ashamed, Tesla and Jaguar must be over the moon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,513 Posts
Tophe74 said:
Except that the Mercedes is 450km WLTP not 500 and the battery is 80kw. So not so far from I pace in km/wh.
This is what the article says that I read - so NEDC is 450 and WLTP is 400.
The motors are powered by a battery pack of 80 kWh and with this the EQC comes at a specified consumption of 22.2 kWh per 100 km 'more than 450 km' according to the old NEDC standard. Under the WLTP regime, some 400 km remain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,513 Posts
I expect the efficiency of the EQC to be a bit worse than so far reported.

Very surprissed that Mercedes in their EQC launch left lots of details out and with regards to range focussed on reported NEDC rather than WLTP. To my knowledge NEDC is not allowed to be used for new cars since Sept 2017 so why did they mention that range - Jaguar never mentioned NEDC since the March 2018 launch.

Also curious where all the extra weight is coming from as if the reports are right it is 400kg heavier than I-pace but has 10kW smaller battery and in terms of dimensions is very similar to I-pace (longer & higher but also narrower and shorter wheelbase). Also think it has a smaller trunk with just 500 liters but that could be wrong - the smaller wheelbase would indicate less space for rear passengers.

Last in terms of chargers - it is same 7.4kW AC and slight more powerful DC with 110kW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
That website is spouting figures pulled from thin air - they've got figures for the EQA which isn't even beyond the concept stage, so take those efficiencies with a handful of salt.

However, it seems that Mercedes are now backtracking on that woeful presentation and the range figures they gave on Tuesday:

https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/5/17820710/mercedes-benz-eqc-electric-car-debut-launch-battery-range-fail

They now reckon on 450km NEDC, so still 50km down on i-Pace. However, in terms of efficiency, 80kw for 450km and 90kw for 500km are pretty much equal (286w/mile and 290w/mile respectively).

However, I really think there's something fishy going on with the Mercedes figures - they publicly stated a number of times that range was 'up to 200miles' and yet within 48 hours, they're saying that their presentation was wrong, by nearly 50%!!

As to extra weight, it seems to be coming from the steel crash cage around the front motor and I suspect that MB are using cylinder cells, not pouch cells (basically thousands of AA shaped batteries, which are cheaper to make, but are not as space efficient, probably the reason why they can only fit 80kw into the same space as Jaguar have put 90kw).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,513 Posts
MiCoHi said:
They now reckon on 450km NEDC, so still 50km down on i-Pace. However, in terms of efficiency, 80kw for 450km and 90kw for 500km are pretty much equal (286w/mile and 290w/mile respectively).
I-pace estimated NEDC range is 543km so if you put the 2 next to each other.
NEDC = 543 / 90kW = 6.03 km/kW versus EQC 450 / 80 = 5.63 km/kW
WLTP = 470 / 90kW = 5.22 km/kW versus EQC 400 / 80 = 5.00 km/kW

Whereby purely the extra weight could be the explanation but that raises more questions why the I-pace is not more efficient also considering the permanent magnetic engines which are suppose to be more efficient.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,114 Posts
More EQC footage from a MB friend with full access to the car
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top