GT 4-Door Coupé (X290) 2026 AMG GT 4-Door Vision EV

[Swissbob]

Hey @leylandi another question : Did the GT Foor Doors ICE Is it being cancelled now that the GT4 EV is coming out!? A facelift with this new interior could be really cool.

Yes.
Although there’s demand,but they don’t care.

 

[leylandi]

Not been cancelled officially yet I don't think. I think they moved production to a different facility though?
Someone may need to fact check me on that.

Production has already ended.

 

[Swissbob]

Production has already ended.

Another case in which the predecessor was far better than the successor.

 

[Merc1]

Interesting. No final edition of anything. They may be reconsidering another ICE version since the EV thing didn't go as originally thought/planned.

M

 

[Jonathan19]

Oh, so there won't be a facelift for the current GT4 ICE!? I suppose the new E63 with the V8 will be a sort of successor. We’ll see.

 

[leylandi]

Yes, there's no update. Now there's only the electric GT.

 

[Swissbob]

They really wanted to go full EV on all models, but the customers disagreed.

 

[Design FIRST]

...but they don’t care.

Or, perhaps some broader picture, larger horizon foresight has been exercised ?

Surely you've heard. More recent current events could quite conceivably usher a radical fast-tracking of energy related transformation. This is not a la-la ideological environmental narrative...this is geoeconomics, commerce and ensuring the sustainability of such.

 

[Dopebouy]

Yes, there's no update. Now there's only the electric GT.

They really need to invest in putting that M177 EVO in the new GT 4 door. In 700hp Mild-Hybrid guise.

 

[Dopebouy]

Yes.
Although there’s demand,but they don’t care.

Similar case with the CLS63 back then, remember?

 

[Swissbob]

Similar case with the CLS63 back then, remember?

Exactly. Or the 6.2 engines, nobody asked Mercedes Benz to bin these engines.

They did lots of stupid decisions.

 

[Swissbob]

Or, perhaps some broader picture, larger horizon foresight has been exercised ?

Surely you've heard. More recent current events could quite conceivably usher a radical fast-tracking of energy related transformation. This is not a la-la ideological environmental narrative...this is geoeconomics, commerce and ensuring the sustainability of such.

I still think the current events are only temporary.

There’s a market for EVs, no doubt, but not in this class.

What is the difference If you produce electricity with gas or oil power stations, or If you burn the fuel in the cars.
You’re dependent from the imports anyway.

 

[Design FIRST]

I still think the current events are only temporary.

And even should this be the case, this has always been an ebb and flow throughout history. Somehow, shit has the tendency to repeat itself.

There’s a market for EVs, no doubt, but not in this class.

I could suggest that the discussion be revitalized within the realm of a shorter time horizon. 4-5 years maybe. Perhaps less.

What is the difference If you produce electricity with gas or oil power stations, or If you burn the fuel in the cars.
You’re dependent from the imports anyway.

Innovation seldomly moves as rapidly as in the fields of solar and wind energy as well as modular nuclear reactors. And of course, the storage of the energy harvested. Dilettantism in politics and instances of deeply entrenched corporate skepticism and anxiety prove obstructive to transformation. But eventually, even the most stubborn reactionaries will realize that "shit is getting alarmingly real".

 

[klier]

Exactly. Or the 6.2 engines, nobody asked Mercedes Benz to bin these engines.

Nobody asked. They were simply told.

By regulations.

 

[Dopebouy]

Nobody asked. They were simply told.

By regulations.

Them 6.2 motors were cool, wish they could pull a Chevy & return them with Hybrid tech to offset emissions since it’s gotten so advanced lately

 

[Swissbob]

Nobody asked. They were simply told.

By regulations.

They were thirsty and the taxation in China would be expensive.

Otherwise the emissions were not an issue at all.

Because they had no DI they could stay without GPF.

 

[Swissbob]

And even should this be the case, this has always been an ebb and flow throughout history. Somehow, shit has the tendency to repeat itself.

I could suggest that the discussion be revitalized within the realm of a shorter time horizon. 4-5 years maybe. Perhaps less.


Innovation seldomly moves as rapidly as in the fields of solar and wind energy as well as modular nuclear reactors. And of course, the storage of the energy harvested. Dilettantism in politics and instances of deeply entrenched corporate skepticism and anxiety prove obstructive to transformation. But eventually, even the most stubborn reactionaries will realize that "shit is getting alarmingly real".

I agree on most things.


But I disagree that things are getting alarmingly real.

 

[Design FIRST]

But I disagree that things are getting alarmingly real.

A number of nonpartisan international "think tank" organizations will beg to differ. Diesel fuel prices up some 40%, Super up some 25%, end customer LNG prices up some 25% in Germany since the beginning of the current Persian Gulf war "beg to differ". And even should we see price declines should and when things ease, the realization of the severe pitfalls of fossil fuel dependancies will have firmly implanted itself in the minds of many. Very many. Hopefully. This has long transcended the predominantly ideologically cemented environmental aspects. It is all about sustainable economic, security and sovereignity issues.

 

[AbsoluteUnit]

predominantly ideologically cemented environmental aspects.

I'm sorry, but this is just factually incorrect.
Environmental concerns are legitimate, and based on scientific consensus.
The opposition to those claims are what are ideologically (and profit) driven.

 

[Design FIRST]

I'm sorry, but this is just factually incorrect.

"This has long transcended the predominantly ideologically cemented environmental aspects. It is all about sustainable economic, security and sovereignity issues."

More perhaps "insufficiently articulated on my part" rather than "factually incorrect".

What I wanted to convey is that, by example, the "Green/NO NUKES/NUCLEAR POWER ? NO THANKYOU !" movement in Germany and elsewhere of the late 1970s through the early 00s was firmly, almost exclusively, entrenched in environmental preservationist narratives as well as fear of nuclear powerplant disasters ala Tschernobyl. With rapid progress pertaining to the development of sustainable energy sources and the harnessing of the energy that they generate by way of efficient storage, the narrative has evolved into one that also encompasses economic, commercial and national security issues as well. And hence, goes far beyond the aspects that were first showcased by a large public movement and has since occupied a space that presents a far larger scope. In addition, I most certainly understand that global warming is a very real issue.

Hopefully, I have now articulated my standpoint in a more, for you and perhaps others as well,coherent manner. In the end, it's really simply my personal understanding and 2 cent donation to the discussion.