EQE (V295) [Renders] 2022 Mercedes-Benz EQE

[SKY]

LOL calling ignorant to everyone who disagrees with you must appear on the first page of the How to Make Friends guide.

 

[leylandi]

LOL calling ignorant to everyone who disagrees with you must appear on the first page of the How to Make Friends guide.

What else can one call a truly ignorant man?

 

[SKY]

What else can one call a truly ignorant man?

Well, I would start by asking myself whether my own actions give me credit to call anyone else an ignorant.

Maybe we are missing some serious potential here. But certainly, being the one who always posts MB spy pics and trolls the threads of the cars you dislike does not qualify as much IMO.

 

[klier]

Mercedes is a premium brand. not skoda. Are you knowingly ignorant?

I could switch Mercedes for BMW and it would be the same, it's premium vs non premium and pricepoint.

 

[Grosser]

So which one has more interior volume at the end?

 

[fortuner]

Everyone on this forum knows EQE rival from BMW will be I5 what a silly argument.

 

[leylandi]

So which one has more interior volume at the end?

EQE

 

[dalab]

It is almost 16 cm longer and with a dedicated EV platform, it would be the last straw if it was not bigger inside

 

[Grosser]

What does put them in different segments? Power? Internal dimensions?

What's the difference inside?

 

[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

 

[Deleted member 57437]

segments are determined by external dimensions.

The Lucid Air is perhaps the most compelling rebuttal to that particular argument.

 

[Giannis]

What else can one call a truly ignorant man?

You could try to enlighten people, instead of calling them names. That would certainly be more productive.

 

[Matski]

Since the EQE is longer, taller and wider than the i4 on the outside, larger interior dimensions would hardly be surprise. If we're talking about space efficiency the available interior space against the external dimensions ratio is what should be discussed, but since Mercedes and BMW do not offer a full set of equivalent dimensions, it's not really possible to get a full picture (specifically in terms of leg room)... I'm not going to spend too much time on it, but...

Proportion of vehicle height that is 'front headroom' (Front headroom ÷ Body Height (Total height - ride height))
EQE 1027mm ÷ 1369mm = 75.0%
i4 1015mm ÷ 1323mm = 76.7%

Proportion of vehicle height that is 'rear headroom' (Rear headroom ÷ Body Height (Total height - ride height))
EQE 950mm ÷ 1369mm = 69.4%
i4 944mm ÷ 1323 = 71.4%

Proportion of vehicle width that is front shoulder space. (Front shoulder width ÷ Vehicle width (excl. mirrors))
EQE 1542mm ÷ 1902mm = 81.1%
i4 1470mm ÷ 1852mm = 79.4%

Proportion of vehicle width that is front shoulder space. (Rear shoulder width ÷ Vehicle width (excl. mirrors))
EQE 1482mm ÷ 1902mm = 77.9%
i4 1445mm ÷ 1852mm = 78%

Luggage capacity as percentage of Gross vehicle volume (Luggage Capacity (seats up) ÷ Gross volume of Vehicle (L×W×H))
EQE 430 litres ÷ 14,139 litres = 3.0%
i4 470 litres ÷ 12,826 litres = 3.7%

Luggage capacity as percentage of Gross vehicle volume (Luggage Capacity (seats down) ÷ Gross volume of Vehicle (L×W×H))
EQE 895 litres ÷ 14,139 litres = 6.3%
i4 1290 litres ÷ 12,826 litres = 10.1%

As for legroom, Mercedes offer squab length, knee height and reach dimensions, BMW just quote a legroom dimension (as far as I've seen).

Based on this quick look, yeah, the EQE has more space, because it's bigger (whoda thunk it?!), but the difference in the efficiency of the packaging is reasonably negligible. Perhaps it all comes down to legroom.

 

[CrunchSlaughtered]

Since the EQE is longer, taller and wider than the i4 on the outside, larger interior dimensions would hardly be surprise. If we're talking about space efficiency the available interior space against the external dimensions ratio is what should be discussed, but since Mercedes and BMW do not offer a full set of equivalent dimensions, it's not really possible to get a full picture (specifically in terms of leg room)... I'm not going to spend too much time on it, but...

Proportion of vehicle height that is 'front headroom' (Front headroom ÷ Body Height (Total height - ride height))
EQE 1027mm ÷ 1369mm = 75.0%
i4 1015mm ÷ 1323mm = 76.7%

Proportion of vehicle height that is 'rear headroom' (Rear headroom ÷ Body Height (Total height - ride height))
EQE 950mm ÷ 1369mm = 69.4%
i4 944mm ÷ 1323 = 71.4%

Proportion of vehicle width that is front shoulder space. (Front shoulder width ÷ Vehicle width (excl. mirrors))
EQE 1542mm ÷ 1902mm = 81.1%
i4 1470mm ÷ 1852mm = 79.4%

Proportion of vehicle width that is front shoulder space. (Rear shoulder width ÷ Vehicle width (excl. mirrors))
EQE 1482mm ÷ 1902mm = 77.9%
i4 1445mm ÷ 1852mm = 78%

Luggage capacity as percentage of Gross vehicle volume (Luggage Capacity (seats up) ÷ Gross volume of Vehicle (L×W×H))
EQE 430 litres ÷ 14,139 litres = 3.0%
i4 470 litres ÷ 12,826 litres = 3.7%

Luggage capacity as percentage of Gross vehicle volume (Luggage Capacity (seats down) ÷ Gross volume of Vehicle (L×W×H))
EQE 895 litres ÷ 14,139 litres = 6.3%
i4 1290 litres ÷ 12,826 litres = 10.1%

As for legroom, Mercedes offer squab length, knee height and reach dimensions, BMW just quote a legroom dimension (as far as I've seen).

Based on this quick look, yeah, the EQE has more space, because it's bigger (whoda thunk it?!), but the difference in the efficiency of the packaging is reasonably negligible. Perhaps it all comes down to legroom.

With almost all EVs the manufacturers cheat with the head room positioning the rear seat too low compared to the height of the space where the feet are kept, resultibg in the knee high position, which is not good comfort wise.

 

[Matski]

With almost all EVs the manufacturers cheat with the head room positioning the rear seat too low compared to the height of the space where the feet are kept, resultibg in the knee high position, which is not good comfort wise.

It would be handy if the reporting of these measurements was standardised. Mercedes are better at it than BMW, but as you say, the rake angle of squab can make the numbers look better but the comfort worse...

 

[dalab]

For me it was always like that...

Beyond the "manual" rules, luxury brands, when entering more compact segments, add the word "premium" to it, such as the A3 or Classe A, which are from the C segment but better said "premium compacts"

"A generally accepted classification, such as the following table, is the one that divides the automobile market into six segments identified with the first six letters of the alphabet, which is made according to the length of the car, although some have factors such as engine power: a Clio RS will continue to be a utility regardless of its power level, which is an incorrect argument."

SEGMENT	LENGTH	MODELS
Segment A	from 3,30 m to 3,70 m	Kia Picanto / Smart Fortwo
Segment B	from 3,70 m to 4,20 m	Ford Fiesta / Renault Zoe
Segment C	from 4,20 m to 4,60 m	Audi A3 / Mazda3 SportSedan
Segment D	from 4,60 m to 4,90 m	BMW Serie 3 / Opel insignia Grand Sport
Segment E	from 4,90 m to 5 m	Mercedes Clase E / Jaguar XF
Segment F	More than 5 m	Porsche Panamera / Mercedes Clase S

"The E segment is the luxury one, with models that fall between 4.9 meters and 5 meters. From this length, the "representative" F-segment with more than 5 meters and worthy representatives of the power of the brand."

"Segmentation allows you to detect market niches, special opportunities that can represent a turning point against the competition, but also have a risk. A bet with good results was the BMW X6 opening the new niche of the SUV Coupé; a gamble gone wrong, the CLS Shooting Brake; a coupe-like family that has not succeeded enough to have a substitute."

 

[CrunchSlaughtered]

For me it was always like that...

Beyond the "manual" rules, luxury brands, when entering more compact segments, add the word "premium" to it, such as the A3 or Classe A, which are from the C segment but better said "premium compacts"

"A generally accepted classification, such as the following table, is the one that divides the automobile market into six segments identified with the first six letters of the alphabet, which is made according to the length of the car, although some have factors such as engine power: a Clio RS will continue to be a utility regardless of its power level, which is an incorrect argument."

SEGMENT	LENGTH	MODELS
Segment A	from 3,30 m to 3,70 m	Kia Picanto / Smart Fortwo
Segment B	from 3,70 m to 4,20 m	Ford Fiesta / Renault Zoe
Segment C	from 4,20 m to 4,60 m	Audi A3 / Mazda3 SportSedan
Segment D	from 4,60 m to 4,90 m	BMW Serie 3 / Opel insignia Grand Sport
Segment E	from 4,90 m to 5 m	Mercedes Clase E / Jaguar XF
Segment F	More than 5 m	Porsche Panamera / Mercedes Clase S

"The E segment is the luxury one, with models that fall between 4.9 meters and 5 meters. From this length, the "representative" F-segment with more than 5 meters and worthy representatives of the power of the brand."

"Segmentation allows you to detect market niches, special opportunities that can represent a turning point against the competition, but also have a risk. A bet with good results was the BMW X6 opening the new niche of the SUV Coupé; a gamble gone wrong, the CLS Shooting Brake; a coupe-like family that has not succeeded enough to have a substitute."

These are yesterday news. With EVs it is different. Lenght is not the important factor. You can have very short front part and thus reducing the overall lenght. The battery in the floor is the real issue and very few companies have managed to optimise the available space in a way allowing good comfort for the passengers.

 

[dalab]

These are yesterday news. With EVs it is different. Lenght is not the important factor. You can have very short front part and thus reducing the overall lenght. The battery in the floor is the real issue and very few companies have managed to optimise the available space in a way allowing good comfort for the passengers.

It's understandable, due to the EV revolution that has been changing a lot of what was previously established, but is there already an official standard about it like this for reference? or they are still thinking how it would be, I think the last

 

[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

How can a car with such a big panel gap over the front wheel pass inspection and leave the factory?

M

 

[Deleted member 57437]

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

How can a car with such a big panel gap over the front wheel pass inspection and leave the factory?

M

German-language auto-vloggers have been criticizing front-end panel gaps on the EQ sedans. However, as far as the EQS sedan is concerned, examples that have been recently leaving the assembly lines show noticable improvement. This sort of "phenomenon" is nothing new to M-B (and/or other manufacturers as well). Even when it came to such "sacred" M-Bs' such as the W124, I clearly recall that the cars that first came off of the lines were "full of bugs". Most notebly the notorious "bucking and yawing" of the drivetrains/suspensions ("Bonanza-Effekt"), loose front seat rails, far from perfect non-metallic paint finishes. We won't even mention "fleabags" such as the pre-MOPF W210, W220, W203, C208/C209 CLKs'...