E-Class W214 [Official] New Mercedes-Benz E-Class (W214)

[AbsoluteUnit]

This is not true.

Always by products for what they are. Not what they could be. Software can be harder than software.

A business might launch a software but then lose the staff that developed it or don't want to repay the licence fee or consultancy for development software. This is especially true if the software stack includes different service providers or tools.

With cars, they usually fix issues by addressing them in the succeeding model that they want you to buy.

I don't think that's how it works.
If its a third-party developed drivetrain logic, then you don't just pay a license fee once for the software and call it a day. You will enter in a software support agreement to maintain that software in case of future software issues or defects. Otherwise you'd be completely f#cked if your provider made a mistake. There are contingencies built in for this exact reason. And I imagine there is heavy legislature involved given that problems can be fatal when vehicles are concerned.
Regarding the point about usage of multiple service providers. Well, when you're doing a software deployment there will be a considerable amount of development time and resources placed on integration and integration testing. Especially if its microservices-based. We're talking about drivetrain logic here, so I'm not entirely sure microservices are relevant. But even if we do have different logic being handled by different companies, once again there will likely be an internal Mercedes team working on integration between different pieces of software. And of course there will be a customer support agreement covering change management and defects.
With regards to loss of personnel. Well codebases will exist irrespective of who authored it. The code isn't just lost to the aether, its stored centrally. Perhaps using Github or Gitlab or whatever else. Software engineers come and go all the time. Perhaps there will be time needed to learn how the code works and tweak it, but it is possible. We're not dealing with arcane knowledge here, just programming languages.

And you are right about issues being fixed in succeeding models. However, that is only true historically. And even then its not entirely true. Models have had recalls due to defects, software issues and whatnot plenty of times. The issue wasn't just allowed to remain until the next model. The recalled cars are well... recalled, updated (can be a hardware or indeed a software fix) and then returned to the customers that bought them. There are also in-cycle adjustments. If say for example an engine has faulty fuel injectors (say like the N53 and N54), firstly there will be either be a recall to fix them if the issue is very widespread. Or the manufacturer will update their warranty and allow owners to have those issues fixed free of charge, under warranty. And then they won't just continue to sell a car with frequently failing injectors, they'll change the part to a more reliable part, so that they don't have to keep fixing cars for free for the full 10 year life-cycle of a car. There is an entire element of product lifecycle management that covers this. Not just for automotive, but all kinds of manufacturing. Software is an element of product lifecycle management.

More broadly, nowadays more and more manufacturers are moving towards centralised computers for their in-car logic (think BMW's "heart of joy") and general connectedness of modern vehicles, it would not surprise me if there are over-the-air updates possible for things like drivetrain logic. Or they could do a stealth update before/during the facelift.

Its complicated sure, but this is not outside the realms of possibility. These car companies are as much software companies and system integrators as much they are vehicle manufacturers.

 

[Centurion]

I don't think that's how it works.
If its a third-party developed drivetrain logic, then you don't just pay a license fee once for the software and call it a day. You will enter in a software support agreement to maintain that software in case of future software issues or defects. Otherwise you'd be completely f#cked if your provider made a mistake. There are contingencies built in for this exact reason. And I imagine there is heavy legislature involved given that problems can be fatal when vehicles are concerned.
Regarding the point about usage of multiple service providers. Well, when you're doing a software deployment there will be a considerable amount of development time and resources placed on integration and integration testing. Especially if its microservices-based. We're talking about drivetrain logic here, so I'm not entirely sure microservices are relevant. But even if we do have different logic being handled by different companies, once again there will likely be an internal Mercedes team working on integration between different pieces of software. And of course there will be a customer support agreement covering change management and defects.
With regards to loss of personnel. Well codebases will exist irrespective of who authored it. The code isn't just lost to the aether, its stored centrally. Perhaps using Github or Gitlab or whatever else. Software engineers come and go all the time. Perhaps there will be time needed to learn how the code works and tweak it, but it is possible. We're not dealing with arcane knowledge here, just programming languages.

And you are right about issues being fixed in succeeding models. However, that is only true historically. And even then its not entirely true. Models have had recalls due to defects, software issues and whatnot plenty of times. The issue wasn't just allowed to remain until the next model. The recalled cars are well... recalled, updated (can be a hardware or indeed a software fix) and then returned to the customers that bought them. There are also in-cycle adjustments. If say for example an engine has faulty fuel injectors (say like the N53 and N54), firstly there will be either be a recall to fix them if the issue is very widespread. Or the manufacturer will update their warranty and allow owners to have those issues fixed free of charge, under warranty. And then they won't just continue to sell a car with frequently failing injectors, they'll change the part to a more reliable part, so that they don't have to keep fixing cars for free for the full 10 year life-cycle of a car. There is an entire element of product lifecycle management that covers this. Not just for automotive, but all kinds of manufacturing. Software is an element of product lifecycle management.

More broadly, nowadays more and more manufacturers are moving towards centralised computers for their in-car logic (think BMW's "heart of joy") and general connectedness of modern vehicles, it would not surprise me if there are over-the-air updates possible for things like drivetrain logic. Or they could do a stealth update before/during the facelift.

Its complicated sure, but this is not outside the realms of possibility. These car companies are as much software companies and system integrators as much they are vehicle manufacturers.

You are explaining an ideal. Reality is much messier. Just ask VW whose EV’s have wrestled with software issues since 2020 launch and or go further back if you want to include years of R&D.

The worst software in the world are like a house of cards built on a hill. Changing one part might require changing 20-100 other dependencies.

Big fixing can account for 70-80% of the total time and costs. Hence why it’s sometimes cheaper and quicker to build an entirely new product than debug existing one that will generate new revenue.

Sometimes bugs cannot be explained or resolved. Alternatively, you fix one bug but it causes 5 new intended bugs. Basically, some software can be so problematic that you never want to touch it again.

Another issue that occurs often is that the code is super messy and the 2 people involved in writing it left. Then you need to hire for new roles which can take months and then another 3-6 months for them to understand your software stack before commencing any work.

Yes. There are agreements with suppliers for maintaining components or software, but they are not bulletproof proof. There could be an issue with your product and all 4 suppliers involved are pointing the fingers at each other, each saying that their delivery is to spec and fautless. Maintenance agreements also expire and sometimes a supplier would product software and then hand it over to the customer.

Finally, during development there are unit tests that can be successful. However when integration tests starts, things don’t work well. This is why Tesla and Space X develop as much as possible in-house. They can reduce complexity, speed up R&D and avoid politics getting in the way of progress.

 

[Merc1]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

M

 

[klier]

You are explaining an ideal. Reality is much messier. Just ask VW whose EV’s have wrestled with software issues since 2020 launch and or go further back if you want to include years of R&D.

The worst software in the world are like a house of cards built on a hill. Changing one part might require changing 20-100 other dependencies.

Big fixing can account for 70-80% of the total time and costs. Hence why it’s sometimes cheaper and quicker to build an entirely new product than debug existing one that will generate new revenue.

Sometimes bugs cannot be explained or resolved. Alternatively, you fix one bug but it causes 5 new intended bugs. Basically, some software can be so problematic that you never want to touch it again.

Another issue that occurs often is that the code is super messy and the 2 people involved in writing it left. Then you need to hire for new roles which can take months and then another 3-6 months for them to understand your software stack before commencing any work.

Yes. There are agreements with suppliers for maintaining components or software, but they are not bulletproof proof. There could be an issue with your product and all 4 suppliers involved are pointing the fingers at each other, each saying that their delivery is to spec and fautless. Maintenance agreements also expire and sometimes a supplier would product software and then hand it over to the customer.

Finally, during development there are unit tests that can be successful. However when integration tests starts, things don’t work well. This is why Tesla and Space X develop as much as possible in-house. They can reduce complexity, speed up R&D and avoid politics getting in the way of progress.

BMW new OS starting with the NK (Panoramic iDrive/ OS X) is 100% in-house (Android based), exactly because of all this what you write. None of what you say here matters for them, they have pretty much complete independence.

 

[Merc1]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Beautiful spec.

M

 

[Design FIRST]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Beautiful spec.

M

It certainly is.

However, I've been recently noticing just how configuration sensitive the W/S214 is. Of course, configuration really counts on ALL automobiles. But the range of appeal-to-non-appeal is particularly pronounced on the current E-Class. Never "ugly", IMHO. But it can be a bit "boring" or "pedestrian". Then again, it can also be utterly stunning. Hence, a car that caters to a vast, highly diverse demographic.

 

[GTA45E]

Overview
Big power and laid-back driving don’t always jibe, but they get along well in the Mercedes-AMG E53. While a turbocharged six-cylinder engine and an electric motor collude to deliver 604 horsepower to all four wheels, the E53 maintains the civility and splendor expected of a Mercedes E-Class.

Richness awaits behind all four of the E53's doors, and the various drive modes change the drive modes from mild to wild at the push of a button. Once you get sick of being coddled, a single hard stab of the accelerator will unleash the fury of the E53's plug-in hybrid powertrain and remind you why there's an AMG badge affixed to the trunk lid.

"We're suckers for brown and, even better, the E53's Sonoran Brown Metallic is a no-cost color choice." Car&Driver

Have to agree with Car&Driver here. I think it looks great, especially with the right interior options.

https://www.caranddriver.com/mercedes-amg/e53-2026

 

[Merc1]

This generation E easily shades the last two generations. It’s a pretty car on the road even in poverty spec.

M

 

[Tuffode]

From the rear 3/4 view I think it is absolutely beautiful, better than the W223 and previous E Classes for sure. The front bothers me, I don't get why this is the only MB ICE car to get the melty EQ style grill especially when the CLE which was introduced after has a normal good looking front end.

 

[Design FIRST]

Overview
Big power and laid-back driving don’t always jibe, but they get along well in the Mercedes-AMG E53. While a turbocharged six-cylinder engine and an electric motor collude to deliver 604 horsepower to all four wheels, the E53 maintains the civility and splendor expected of a Mercedes E-Class.

Richness awaits behind all four of the E53's doors, and the various drive modes change the drive modes from mild to wild at the push of a button. Once you get sick of being coddled, a single hard stab of the accelerator will unleash the fury of the E53's plug-in hybrid powertrain and remind you why there's an AMG badge affixed to the trunk lid.

Have to agree with Car&Driver here. I think it looks great, especially with the right interior options.

https://www.caranddriver.com/mercedes-amg/e53-2026

Particularly "killer" spec on this example. Gorgeous.

 

[Design FIRST]

The front bothers me, I don't get why this is the only MB ICE car to get the melty EQ style grill especially when the CLE which was introduced after has a normal good looking front end.

Different strokes, I suppose.

I love the "EQ Style" front end...and actually believe that it could look very good on the CLE as well. With somewhat shallower, squinting headlamp units to distinguish it from the W/S 214 E's.

 

[Rolf]

I saw a E300 W214 for the first time yesterday and think the styling looks pretty good in real life. It looks different to the S-class and C-class but still has that family look. I think it also looks better than the FL W213 models but I still prefer my Pre FL car styling more.

Certainly is a much prettier car than the latest fugly 5 series.

Apologies for the poor quality of the photos don't know what happened with my phone yesterday.

 

[AbsoluteUnit]

I saw a E300 W214 for the first time yesterday and think the styling looks pretty good in real life. It looks different to the S-class and C-class but still has that family look. I think it also looks better than the FL W213 models but I still prefer my Pre FL car styling more.

Certainly is a much prettier car than the latest fugly 5 series.

Apologies for the poor quality of the photos don't know what happened with my phone yesterday.

I'm seeing more and more of them around these days. Honestly, I think in terms of the shape, the W214 is a lot better than the W213. A more classic front end would definitely suit it more, but hopefully that comes with the facelift.

 

[leylandi]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[leylandi]

 

[Monster]

This would have been the perfect one car solution for us, but Mercedes Australia decided not to import the E53 estate to Australia.

 

[Mr. Mercedes]

This would have been the perfect one car solution for us, but Mercedes Australia decided not to import the E53 estate to Australia.

I know mate. It's painful watching you car shop without having any MB's to look at LOL.

 

[Giannis]

This would have been the perfect one car solution for us, but Mercedes Australia decided not to import the E53 estate to Australia.

I'm fairly sure, this won't be a problem for you. After all, you do not drive your cars.

 

[klier]

This would have been the perfect one car solution for us, but Mercedes Australia decided not to import the E53 estate to Australia.

M3 Touring is far more perfect.

 

[AbsoluteUnit]

M3 Touring is far more perfect.

Its a smaller car tho. But I'm sure it would be a blast to drive.