Mercedez Benz News Daimler Stopping Development of Future Internal Combustion Engines

[Drew Dowdell 11,772]

In a surprise announcement, Daimler has said that they are stopping further development of internal combustion engines to focus solely on electric vehicle development.  In a statement to Auto Motor und Sport, Daimler says they have no plans to develop a next generation of their IC engines. The current generation, just recently released, may be their last. 

Daimler did go on to explain that while the engine families may not be replaced, there still would be work on certain components to improve performance in the future. Engine families have fairly long timelines, usually around a decade long, so this announcement still gives Daimler some breathing room for the immediate future. 

Daimler is currently facing up to a €1 Billion For Diesel Cheating. 

 

View full article

[USA-1 755]

Insanity apparently still running rampant at Daimler Benz. I think there's going to be a solid place for the ICE far into the future, at least 25 or 30 years, running alongside with the EV of course. I've worked in the EVSE industry for Blink here in AZ and it's been a very slow adoption for the masses. Battery tech. is getting better and charge times are down, but the harder you slam the batteries with high power like a Level 3 station or a very high amperage Level 2, it dramatically reduces the battery life and causes a lot of heat that needs to be controlled to protect the batteries. ICE in the U.S. are very clean running now days and if there's any glitch in the catalyst the OBD-II throws a code and lights up your dash so it's pretty well controlled.  

[Drew Dowdell 11,772]

Well look how long the Buick 3.8 liter ran.... they just kept making updates to it without changing the engine family.  I'd wager that's what Benz is going to be doing. 

[smk4565 1,125]

The 48 volt mild hybrid V8, Inline 6 and inline 4 are new engines, most models don't even have them yet.   So you figure this is a fresh engine line, the 4.0 V8 has been around a few years, but has a 2020 MY update.  The I-6 launched in 2019. That engine line with little tweaks and upgrades can get them to 2030.  By then they will have an all EV line up I would imagine.

[Drew Dowdell 11,772]

7 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The 48 volt mild hybrid V8, Inline 6 and inline 4 are new engines, most models don't even have them yet.   So you figure this is a fresh engine line, the 4.0 V8 has been around a few years, but has a 2020 MY update.  The I-6 launched in 2019. That engine line with little tweaks and upgrades can get them to 2030.  By then they will have an all EV line up I would imagine.

Definitely.... with the engine lines that just came out, they'll have 10 to 15 years of ICE.  And if they need to, they can just keep increasing the amount of power that comes from electric and decreasing the ICE size (instead of an I6 lite hybrid, an I4 hybrid with a stronger EV component) 

[balthazar 10,798]

I wonder if that's not precisely how Daimler plans to force people into their EVs, by eroding the IC's.

[smk4565 1,125]

1 hour ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Definitely.... with the engine lines that just came out, they'll have 10 to 15 years of ICE.  And if they need to, they can just keep increasing the amount of power that comes from electric and decreasing the ICE size (instead of an I6 lite hybrid, an I4 hybrid with a stronger EV component) 

About 10-12 years is what they get from an engine, and that usually involves some overhauls along the way.  They could go to  a turbo 4 with more electric power, but I feel like in 10 years they'll have the batteries figured out and no one is going to want a n ICE when you can just get any amount of power you want from an electric, with more cabin space and less maintenance.  Wouldn't surprise me if the whole Mercedes line was electric only in 2030.

[balthazar 10,798]

Ready for every model's MSRP to double? C-class EV : $82,000 ??

[Drew Dowdell 11,772]

4 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

About 10-12 years is what they get from an engine, and that usually involves some overhauls along the way.  They could go to  a turbo 4 with more electric power, but I feel like in 10 years they'll have the batteries figured out and no one is going to want a n ICE when you can just get any amount of power you want from an electric, with more cabin space and less maintenance.  Wouldn't surprise me if the whole Mercedes line was electric only in 2030.

C&G will be 32 years old by then, well be able to come back and see

1 minute ago, balthazar said:

Ready for every model's MSRP to double? C-class EV : $82,000 ??

No necessarily. Costs will come down. The already are.

[USA-1 755]

2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

C&G will be 32 years old by then, well be able to come back and see

No necessarily. Costs will come down. The already are.

Battery costs have already come down from even just 5 years ago with latest tech. in the chemical compositions, so it really comes down to the precious metals in the Li-ion cells and traction motors.

Cadillac has already announced back in January that they will have an EV flagship SUV on the new GM BEV3 architecture within the next 3 or 4 years , but they know the cash cow ICE models like Escalade sell too well to walk away entirely anytime soon. The future of the automobile will be very interesting for sure.     

[Miradart 22]

This isn't as shocking as some may think.  For anyone who follows the recent advancement in EV's, batteries, and solar PV power, the writing is on the wall for the death of the ICE.  

About half a decade ago, I'd have balked at that statement, but things can change in 5 years.  Especially the past 5 years.  

Sure, there will still be ICE engines sold 5 or 10 years from now.  But those will be holdout projects, sold to people where the infrastructure, OR corporate interference in has made a changeover implausible.   

[balthazar 10,798]

Look at the numbers.

[ccap41 4,048]

11 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

No necessarily. Costs will come down. The already are.

When does that ever transition to the consumer? 

[Drew Dowdell 11,772]

2 hours ago, balthazar said:

Look at the numbers.

I"m guessing the people at benz are smarter about this than anyone on this message board. 

1 hour ago, ccap41 said:

When does that ever transition to the consumer? 

It already has in the form of range increases without cost increases. When the leaf came out, it only had about 100 mile range. The bolt was released at about the same price as the leaf, but had a 235 mile range. GM just increased the range of the bolt again with no increase to price. 

[balthazar 10,798]

Since charging costs are nearly unilaterally ignored, and MPG increases in IC vehicles really never had a direct correlation to MSRP, I question the equivalency of 20 more miles of range (Bolt) being a ‘cost reduction’.

[David 6,654]

15 hours ago, USA-1 Vortec 6.2 said:

Insanity apparently still running rampant at Daimler Benz. I think there's going to be a solid place for the ICE far into the future, at least 25 or 30 years, running alongside with the EV of course. I've worked in the EVSE industry for Blink here in AZ and it's been a very slow adoption for the masses. Battery tech. is getting better and charge times are down, but the harder you slam the batteries with high power like a Level 3 station or a very high amperage Level 2, it dramatically reduces the battery life and causes a lot of heat that needs to be controlled to protect the batteries. ICE in the U.S. are very clean running now days and if there's any glitch in the catalyst the OBD-II throws a code and lights up your dash so it's pretty well controlled.  

I will state that I disagree with you and the flip to EV will happen faster than the flip from horse and buggy to ICE. With the introduction of various fast charging solid state batteries and tech such as the story below that removes the heat and explosion issue along with the early death of current Li Ion batteries, we will see the move faster than people are expecting. 

Yes some categories such as long haul trucking will be ICE for the next 25 to 50 years, but inner city to suburban will flip much faster once an assortment of auto's are out.

This tech also is in beta testing with auto companies and I expect this will be a big game changer along with the solid state dry material info I posted above.

 

[balthazar 10,798]

WRT my comment toward miradart; the stated implication that EVs are going to have 90-95% of the market in “5” years is ridiculous & unsupportable.

[Drew Dowdell 11,772]

5 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Since charging costs are nearly unilaterally ignored, and MPG increases in IC vehicles really never had a direct correlation to MSRP, I question the equivalency of 20 more miles of range (Bolt) being a ‘cost reduction’.

20 miles, no... but going from Leaf to Bolt for the same price... that's over 100 miles? That's a cost reduction.

[balthazar 10,798]

1 minute ago, dfelt said:

I will state that I disagree with you and the flip to EV will happen faster than the flip from horse and buggy to ICE.

Let’s quantify that; how long DID it take to move to autos from horses, exactly?

Because a ton of the general commentary I’ve read acts like the 1997 hybrid electric prius hasn’t had a 23-yr run to date and EVs were unveiled for the first time the day before said commentary was made.

Look at the market share of hybrid electrics and electrics over the past 20 years thru 2019.

1 minute ago, Drew Dowdell said:

20 miles, no... but going from Leaf to Bolt for the same price... that's over 100 miles? That's a cost reduction.

An OPERATING cost reduction, not a purchase cost reduction.

[David 6,654]

4 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Let’s quantify that; how long DID it take to move to autos from horses, exactly?

Because a ton of the general commentary I’ve read acts like the 1997 hybrid electric prius hasn’t had a 23-yr run to date and EVs were unveiled for the first time the day before said commentary was made.

Look at the market share of hybrid electrics and electrics over the past 20 years thru 2019.

I get the point your making but Prius did not inspire the bulk of the public and so a tight, ugly little hybrid like their product line was not going to change things fast.

Yet with all OEMs bringing out EVs to their standard lineup, I see a change over happening much faster for the EVs than Hybrids, etc.

As stated here by you, me, and many others, most buyers do not care what is under the hood. 

If they have a 300 to 400 mile range, like the interior and the over all price is in their budget, they will buy and change habits to plugging in at home and having a full battery pack every morning.

[Drew Dowdell 11,772]

19 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Let’s quantify that; how long DID it take to move to autos from horses, exactly?

Because a ton of the general commentary I’ve read acts like the 1997 hybrid electric prius hasn’t had a 23-yr run to date and EVs were unveiled for the first time the day before said commentary was made.

Look at the market share of hybrid electrics and electrics over the past 20 years thru 2019.

An OPERATING cost reduction, not a purchase cost reduction.

Sure it is a purchasing cost reduction.  Until the Bolt was made, $30ish thousand dollars got you 100ish miles of range.  Once the Bolt was released, $30ish thousand dollars got you 235 miles of range.  Prior to that, to get over 200 miles of range cost around $60ish k.

Putting it another way... if the Silverado 2500 were suddenly the same price as a 1500, that is a big cost reduction.

And Range doesn't effect operating costs any more than a bigger gas tank does.  If you're getting X miles out of Y amount of juice, it doesn't cost you less just because you fill up less often. 

 

[balthazar 10,798]

Well price has always been a market problem, with no signs of abating in the near future. But I disagree that it being electric is of no consequence; EVs are always compared straight to other EVs, and situations such as saying the $154K Taycan is going to compete w the $81K Model S pretty much proves that. Recall all the pieces comparing the Model 3 to the Bolt?

5 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Sure it is a purchasing cost reduction.  Until the Bolt was made, $30ish thousand dollars got you 100ish miles of range.  Once the Bolt was released, $30ish thousand dollars got you 235 miles of range.  Prior to that, to get over 200 miles of range cost around $60ish k.

Not if you bought a IC vehicle.

[ccap41 4,048]

47 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

It already has in the form of range increases without cost increases. When the leaf came out, it only had about 100 mile range. The bolt was released at about the same price as the leaf, but had a 235 mile range. GM just increased the range of the bolt again with no increase to price. 

So the answer was, "no"...

I can't wait for my $50,000 car to have 1000 miles of range!  

[USA-1 755]

46 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Since charging costs are nearly unilaterally ignored, and MPG increases in IC vehicles really never had a direct correlation to MSRP, I question the equivalency of 20 more miles of range (Bolt) being a ‘cost reduction’.

Exactly right. I know for a fact that GM (as well as other manufacturers I would hope) always has more range left in the packs, but electronically limits it to either have more available in new MY vehicles to woo the consumer or to release more in a specific vehicle as other battery cells start to die. So there's no new cost in it for them, the consumer already paid for it when they bought the car. Same story for ICE vehicles of course. 

[Drew Dowdell 11,772]

14 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

So the answer was, "no"...

I can't wait for my $50,000 car to have 1000 miles of range!  

Getting more for your money is not a price reduction?

Okay, forget the Leaf.  Before the Bolt, it cost you $60ish k to get over 235 miles of range. After the Bolt it cost you $30ish K. That's a price reduction.

How about another example? I have an old iPod sitting here with 64gb of memory that originally cost about $400. Now you can get one with 256gb for $400... that is a reduction in price.