E-Class (W214) [Renders] Next generation E-Class (W214)

[Mr bmw]

I think the second screen over the Mbux is a test Screen. Not a part of the Display.
From interrior Picture 2

 

[CrunchSlaughtered]

I think the second screen over the Mbux is a test Screen. Not a part of the Display.
From interrior Picture 2

I was about to write the same. This must be the screen of the testing gear.

 

[Luca]

@Mr bmw, sorry which image 2 are you referring to?

 

[klier]

C'mon man! You don't know the whereabouts of your woman? Where she goes, what she wears, what she drives?

Hey now little man! Behave.

 

[Special]

I just wish we don't get the cheap hyper screen bullshit!

if one thing, the hyperscreen is not cheap

 

[klier]

if one thing, the hyperscreen is not cheap

Plot twist:

It becomes cheap if you put it in all your cars.

 

[Centurion]

Plot twist:

It becomes cheap if you put it in all your cars.

Indeed. Touch screens are ubiquitous and it can be cheaper to slap a big screen in a car than designing a dashboard with model specific buttons.

 

[klier]

Indeed. Touch screens are ubiquitous and it can be cheaper to slap a big screen in a car than designing a dashboard with model specific buttons.

It's all kinds of regular screens behind a giant piece of black plastic. It'd be actually impressive if it was a single piece of shaped LCD.

 

[Luca]

in fact it also seems strange to me that on the new class the double side-by-side screen, already seen on the previous version, is proposed again

 

[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

 

[Mick Briesgau]

Got high hopes for this one. Please, don't let there be a cost cutting frenzy.

 

[Merc1]

That and I hope it has proper engines. This and the CLE need to be a proper send off.

M

 

[GTA45E]

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

The soundtrack in this next-generation E-Class is no doubt a hi-performance 4-cylinder.
It has the same drone-like note of the new C43, just a touch deeper. I would not be surprised if MB ditched M256 6 cylinder for the M139 4-pot for the next generation E53.

 

[Merc1]

The soundtrack in this next-generation E-Class is no doubt a hi-performance 4-cylinder.
It has the same drone-like note of the new C43, just a touch deeper. I would not be surprised if MB ditched M256 6 cylinder for the M139 4-pot for the next generation E53.

I'm going to be sick just thinking about that possibility. I don't get the point of developing a truly new engine, an I6 and then not using it everywhere you can.

M

 

[Sunny]

I guess if they want to sell less of smaller cars with small engines, they will have to put the small engines in more premium cars to meet fleet emission requirements... making them less premium? What a paradox!

 

[Merc1]

Which makes no sense if going more upscale and premium is the goal. A veritable mess. A 4-cylinder is NOT luxury.

M

 

[GTA45E]

I'm going to be sick just thinking about that possibility. I don't get the point of developing a truly new engine, an I6 and then not using it everywhere you can.

M

I whole heartedly agree.
I mean all the money spent on ugly EVs and useless concepts, that money should have been funneled toward RandD for a genuine stand-alone, hand-built AMG inline 6.
The M256 from Mercedes is not a real AMG engine though. The M139 is, and there is a good chance, this 4-pot has superior pressure levels, greater rigidity,
and overall higher tolerance level than the M256. Every Mercedes AMG fan should embrace it.

they will have to put the small engines in more premium cars to meet fleet emission requirements... making them less premium? What a paradox!

Correct.

Back in January of 2021, then-President Donald Trump delayed a 2016 regulation that more than doubled penalties imposed upon automakers that failed to meet Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) requirements starting with the 2019 model year. At the time, automakers said that the change would cost the industry upwards of $1 billion each year, though the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was later sued by 15 states for the delay. Now, shortly after the EPA reinstated California’s right to regulate automotive emissions, the NHTSA has also agreed to reinstate these stiffer fuel efficiency penalties, according to Reuters.

The final rule – which is set to take effect 60 days after it’s published – not only reinstates the original, higher penalties, but it also aims to increase them further in future model years after none were collected while the rule was under review and facing challenges in court over the past year-plus. For 2019-2021 model year vehicles, fines are set to increase from $5.50 to $14 for every 0.1 mile-per-gallon new vehicles consume in excess of the agency’s standards.

Meanwhile, automakers that achieve higher fuel economy standards than what is required will be able to sell credits to other automakers that do not, while the value of those credits figures to increase in conjunction with the higher penalties. Automakers have long opposed the rule, however, arguing that it will cost each hundreds of millions of dollars. Stellantis, for example, paid $77.3 million in fines in 2016 and $79 million in 2017, but would need to pay an estimated $608 million under the new regulation. The NHTSA estimates that the cost to automakers will increase from the current average of $115.4 to $294 million.

--->> https://fordauthority.com/2022/03/n...1 model year,excess of the agency's standards.

 

[Luca]

 

[Luca]

incredible, in September 2021 the Carscoops site almost 6 months after its launch having been presented in February 2022, already posted photos of the c class without upholstery, and to date we still can't see almost anything of the future class and

 

[hoffmeister_fan]

Yikes.....