[QUOTE=c4004matic;6212243]For the sake of others who may be interested, here are real-life milage figures achieved by Tesla owners (ie not claimed by the manufacturer): http://www.teslamotors.com/en_EU/for...eal-life-range

As for you, c4004matic, I do love having discussions/arguments with people who stick their fingers in their ears, close their eyes and keep yelling "I know math, this isn't true...I know math, this isn't true". Actually, no, I don't love it at all, so my discussion with you is over.

 

But you may want to get the premium package on the C400 as well, though (which actually costs $2000 more on the C400, in Canada at Least). So it doesn't shrink the gap

Yes, getting the sports package does shrink the gap, but not everyone gets the sports package.

Either way, my point is that $20K, when already spending $70K is not such a huge stretch.
My original plan was a GLA, but I was so disappointed by it once I saw it in person, and so impressed by the C class that the extra $7k for the C300 (the way I would equip both cars), or roughly 20% seems very worth it, and not that big of a stretch...assuming nothing better/different pops up by the time I'm ready to pull the trigger, around spring.

If the two cars were equivalent (ie both make you go to the pump, both cost you the same $ to run/maintain, both having the same environmental impact, both are the same size inside, etc.), then yeah-it would be easy to say "why spend $20K more on this when I can have that". But those other factors do give you 'bang for the buck' and even offsetting the extra cost substantially.

 

[QUOTE=mihaelb;6212307]I just gave you the math. You are simply ignoring it since it shows you are wrong and delusional.
Like your testimonials I've also seen video testimonial that tout the secret government water carburetor and pieces of toast that without a doubt show the image of Jesus. You can hypermile anything when Honda insights and the Prius came out there were people that would get over 100miles per gallon. If you hypermile a c400 you can probably get 40mpg.

 

<<<@!1!@>>>

ok, last response (promise to myself).

math isn't that clear-cut. Gasoline engines aren't NEARLY as efficient as electric motors. Have a look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_efficiency
You can spit out simple mathematical equations that only work in ideal theories in a vacuum all you want, as well as conspiracy theories about what you believe the real milage of the Teslas to be, but reality says different.

Oh, and by the way, EPA does NOT do hypermiling. They have a set course with accelerations, braking and driving at different speeds, and they rated the Tesla for a range of 265 miles.

 

That 37 KW per gallon already includes a correction factor for efficiency which for gas engines is around 40% (electric engines is over 90). I already explained it to you, gasoline has around 10x the power density than the best available battery. Its just a chemistry fact. In order for a battery powered vehicle to compete with an internal combustion engine energy-wise, batteries would have to increase in capacity by a factor of at least 3 and, of course, that does not address the charging issue.
Just a little historical perspective swapping batteries is far from new. In the beginning of the 20th century, more than 100 years ago, electric street cars in many cities had swapping stations for batteries. Can you imagine where you would store the 2 ton battery packs for electric cars for a gas station that can serve up to a thousand cars a day? The Tesla is just like Elon Musk, who is not a scientist nor an engineer... full of hot air. Just because some one makes a billion bucks on a lucky stock bet doesn't make him intelligent, educated or a visionary, just lucky.

 

 

The C450 is replacing the C400, so it won't be 10K more than the current C400 which is 50K now. That would price it out the market and put it too close to the C63 AMG. Ridiculous to think 25% more is not much for most people, because it is. Not sure why again, Tesla is being brought up here.

M

 

Things are probably different in Canada, but in the states the C400 comes with Premium and sport standard. From this, if you take a C300 and add Prem - $2700 and Sport - $2500 (depending on who you trust) that is $5,200 plus $40,400 base price and you get $45,600 + $925 destination and you get $46,525. The C400 is $49,515.

From this, upgrading from a C300 sport + Premium to a C400 costs $2,990 To me, that is well worth it. EDIT: Fixed my math above to the tune of the $25 that I missed.

I hear you on the 20% premium for $0 gas. But still the ROI, assuming $60/wk or $3120/yr is still about 6.5 years (for a $20k price diff). Not terrible, but not necessarily a no-brainer. Plus you are comparing MSRPs, not true cost. From what I am hearing, and I could be wrong here, discounts on C-classes are on the order of 10%+ where Tesla's are pretty much 0.

Regarding the other stuff, I don't give a rats azz about kW/Gal and most of that other stuff. At the end of the day, for me (and probably most people for that matter) 90-95% of the time I drive less than 200miles/day. So I could drive like a 16yr old and still have plenty left over by the time I plug it in in the evening. That works. Stored energy capacity limits are based on need. If you don't need it, then the value approaches zero pretty quickly. Plus the charging station infrastructure is growing. 20min for 80% or whatever it is, will also work even if it is less convenient to get me where I am going on the occasion that I want to drive medium - long distances. But that is me, for others that drive more or whatever the significance obviously changes.

Having said this, I don't believe in spending $85k for a car no matter how much I can afford. Sure, if I hit the lottery (or whatever) and have a couple hundred million burning a hole in my bank card, then things might change. I just won't be holding my breath.

 

Yeah, you Yanks always have it better when it comes to car prices

If you want to do ROI and stick strictly to the numbers (leaving the convenience of never having to go to the gas stations, much-lower environmental impact and reduced maintenance visits), then you also need to include the almost-nil maintenance costs of the Tesla. Can't be bothered with the exact numbers, but it'll reduce the 6.5 years too.

Dunno what the discounts on the Teslas are, TBH. Spending that much on a car right now doesn't make sense for me either at the moment. When you do hit the lottery, and said money is burning holes in your other bank card, buy me one too

 

Something to consider is when you start buying the highest end of a line, like the c450... Many things become standard... Look at the e350 and e400... Base prices are different but e400 comes with more standard items that are optional on e350

Point being that the c300 may start at a much lower price as may the c400 from the c450 but once the c400, for example, is optioned up to the c450 base level the price point won't be $20k between the c400 and c450. C450 without options will likely already have several nice packages included as well as the amg goodies

 

ok so back on topic. C400 is quick. C450 will be quicker.

Where is the proof that the c450 is replacing the c400 for 2016? Also, there were confirmed spy shots of an actual c450 wagon which was pictured in all it's glory.

Was that a test mule and still 2 years in the making, or is everyone speculating at the moment and just providing opinions.
http://www.autoblog.com/2014/05/27/m...for-primetime/

So since we are all providing opinions, to me, it looks like Mercedes is actually making a stripped down AMG model which is most likely the c450. Though price wise, it wouldn't make sense.

 

There is no proof of a 450 sedan its a mythical car (trust me I've looked). The rumor is that a C450, will be announced at the Detroit auto show in Jan. The only pictures of a car with that designation is the new C station wagon. Since the C class designations don't follow displacement anymore I would bet that its simply a station wagon with the C400's engine.
BTW here is a picture:
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/merce...#photo-2640759

 

You guys are sooo lost in this thread.....lol.

M

 

just curious if anyone has tried break torquing a c400 like they did in the video in sport+ mode? I guess race start mode is reserved for the AMG models?

 

Second this question for the C300

 

Torque braking significantly improves times on all turbo engines since it eliminates turbo lag. On non-turbos it may help a bit or not at all depending on the torque converter the car has. The C300 does about 6.5 stomp and go and about 6 seconds with torque braking (according to tests). There are no other launch technique to improve the launch of an automatic cars. It also explains the consistent .5 sec difference between publications. Hope that helps. Sport plus also improves time very significantly since all the car's inputs, like pedal response, transmission mapping etc., are pushed to their limits.
A 300 on comfort mode probably runs 7 seconds to 60 at best. Which BTW is not bad but the car can do much more.

 

Risk of damage to the car?

 

Minimal to none. Simply put your foot on the brake rev to about 1750. Then bury the accelerator when you lift your foot off the brake. There is no need to brutalize the thing, all you are doing is raising the revs while stopped to where the turbo is fully pressurized. I don't recommend doing it every time you take off from a stop, but the occasional jack rabbit start to smoke the guy on a 335 or audi s4 at a stoplight is harmless. Its akin to starting from a stop while towing a heavy load. BTW don't forget to turn off the traction control, I doubt that you will spin the tires (4matic) but if the system is predictive it will kill the whole process.
If you have never done it, you will be amazed with the improvement. On my F150 ecoboost it leaves ridiculous burnouts behind.

 

I find brake torquing better renders me launching than race start on this '63 and it's waaaay easier

 

what is "race start"?

 

It is an automatic launch control mode that comes on the AMG models. It automatically break torques for you on a race start

 

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1...roit-auto-show

 

may not be accurate but this bloomberg review on the C400 shows 6.5 seconds

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-1...-coddling.html

 

6.5 is the 300

 

curious to see numbers on ECU tuned C400...