15/20 years ago, an AMG model E Class, had a different tuned suspension, quicker steering and most important significant increase in power. Often it went from a V6/I6 to a V8 twin turbo (Biturbo in Italian). While the engine could add up to between 50 and 100 lbs.of weight, power was often increased by more than 30%! The performance was outstanding.

Not so with the AMG E53:

• A significant portion of the additional power in the E53 is eaten up by the additional weight over 800 lbs. That is like driving an E Class with four passengers and trunk full of suitcases
• Once the power from the battery is used up, which is after 30/40 miles, because of the additional 800 lbs. of dead weight, the E53 will be slower not faster than an E450.
• Once the battery is depleted, because of the added 800 lbs. of dead weight, handling and ride of the E53 will be worse than the E450 and of course fuel consumption will be greater as well as tire wear.

In years past with an AMG, the extra power and performance remained - it did "fall off a cliff" and diminish as the battery was depleted.


Just my observations.

 

Again, the E53 has its own suspension set up, steering, 2.5 degree rear wheel steering. Weight distribution is actually rear-biased on the E53 which adds to the car feeling lighter than its, admittedly, copious weight. The battery is never fully depleted in the E53, so maximum power is always available...just because range may read 0 for electric, the battery uses something like 21.x/28.x kw of capacity for full electric drive. A lot of reviews are quite positive, some (ie throttle house, who aren't known to be fanboys and seem honest to call out nonsense from car manufacturers) said handling was better than the new M5. If we judge a "real" AMG as requiring a signature on the engine (which really seems to just be nostalgic marketing BS from the company at this point and to provide ammo for the v8 owners), then how do you defend the c43 and glc43 having a signature on their 4 cylinder...apparently the same internals as the widely panned c63 sans the e-drive. I'm sure that c63 is quite a beast despite the negativity. So much unnecessary hate from people here. Enthusiasts (i assume if you're on a forum, you are an enthusiast...or just a complainer) should support other car lovers and whatever makes them enjoy their own cars. This is my first Mercedes, and I'm quite impressed...so whether you have a new one, old one, an E300 or an E53 or a "real" E63s, congrats to having a nice damn car. Some people just need to be less insufferable.

 

I think it's pretty clear all the German manufacturers greatly misjudged the desire and market for a $100,000+ plug-in hybrid. The E53 isn't terrible, and to me looks pretty nice aside from the stupid star taillights. However, people in the tiny performance car market couldn't care less about the price of gas, CO2 emissions, or driving 2 or 20mi on batteries to get groceries and do annoying errands. Lugging around 800lb of battery, electric motors, and a second transmission has no appeal.

The 43 series AMG cars are getting better reviews because they're just mild hybrids with an electric turbo, not plug-ins.

What Mercedes probably should have done is made the E450 a plug-in hybrid with the I6 or I4, and the E53 a mild hybrid with the I6 and electric turbo/ISG like the 43 series.

It's already been announced that a new V8 with mild hybridization probably similar to the 43 series tech is returning.

 

I realize I might in the minority here, but I would have never considered this vehicle if it were not a PHEV. I use my car for a few things, one of them is running around the NYC ‘burbs and city. In both of those cases, pure electric is the way to go all day long. No ability to use more power than the electric provides and using electric is easier (fill up at home). I’m still not really sure if the gas or electric is better value per mile. Another use case is road trips - in that scenario I get to use gas stations and have a long road trip vehicle (what’s the full cruising range on a full tank and full charge?). The last use for me is fun, spirited, driving. For me at least a high performance PHEV checks all boxes. I have a feeling (could be wrong) but that the wagon may find a niche following as it is somewhat unique in the marketplace: less bonkers than the RS6 and less boy-racer than the M5 Touring - sort of a Goldilocks.

 

The Ferrari 296 is a 6 cylinder PHEV - probably the highest rated Ferrari mid-engine sports car. Oh the horror ... that never manifested. I'm in the camp that absolutely wanted the E 53 drivetrain. I don't need the plaque having had a M113 hand built V8 which was a great engine. The M256 is proving to also be a great engine and the history of V8 AMG Hand Builts is far from perfect. Throw in MBs dominance of the F1 Hybrid era. I've had mine since Nov'24, but only have 490 miles. Not a lot of seat time - but holy hell it's a home run. Now - if I could just figure out how to charge it while driving.

 

realize you are joking but on my BMW PHEV you can do just this, though at the cost of increased gas usage.

 

This post needs some levity!! As far as the charging while driving - I really am stumped. The battery hold feature just maintains the current state of charge. I had a Volvo V90 PHEV overseas and there was a specific charge setting. I would set it to that for the highway driving (excellent recharge rate) and once I reached a city went to pure electric for the entire time. Excellent for driving through the small cities amongst lots of people and no pollution. And, it gave me almost a combined total of 750 miles, only needing to fill the car with petrol upon rental return.

 

The attached overview didn't help much.

 

[QUOTE=JTK44;9171812]15/20 years ago, an AMG model E Class, had a different tuned suspension, quicker steering and most important significant increase in power. Often it went from a V6/I6 to a V8 twin turbo (Biturbo in Italian). While the engine could add up to between 50 and 100 lbs.of weight, power was often increased by more than 30%! The performance was outstanding.

Not so with the AMG E53:

• A significant portion of the additional power in the E53 is eaten up by the additional weight over 800 lbs. That suitcases
• Once the power from the battery is used up, which is after 30/40 miles, because of the additional 800 lbs. of dead weight, the E53 will be slower not faster than an E450.
• Once the battery is depleted, because of the added 800 lbs. of dead weight, handling and ride of the E53 will be worse than the E450 and of course fuel consumption will be greater as well as tire wear.

You are misinformed.

 

This is just not how it works. This is based on very old and outdated information on how hybrids work.

 

[QUOTE=petee1997;9172255]You are confusing a hybrid, for example a Toyota Prius, where the engine charges the battery and the two work together and an PHEV:

To simplify, think of the PHEV as an EV with a gas engine: Like an EV, Tesla for example, there is some recharging due to regenerative braking in a PHEV, but like an EV, most of the charge to the battery comes from plugging it in. It is also why the highway range, without regenerative braking, is always substantially less than urban and suburban driving where there is regenerative braking.

If you go the BMW website you will see the Highway mileage for the X5 PHEV is substantially less than for the normal X5. This is because once the battery is depleted, after 30/40miles, you are hauling around the battery, which is 800 lbs. of dead weight.

see: https://www.google.com/search?q=High...t=gws-wiz-serp

Hope this clarifies.

 

Thanks for the very helpful information. My confusion came from driving the Volvo PHEV which made it more upfront via the user interface on the settings. Effectively the same setup as the E 53 in that it was a PHEV, around 80km electric driving range and the electric boosted the ICE. Lots of free charging around the Benelux countries and Hertz provided the cable - so I would occasionally plug it in to charge while visiting the cities. However, you could specifically choose a charge setting in that via highway driving especially, over roughly 2 hours, I could regain the electric used in the city. Typically I would get to the city with 75km range, leave with 30km, and get to the next city with 75 again. As I haven't driven the E 53 much - I thought, I need to find this function on the MB. Read through some of the documents, such as above, and didn't really see anything. Drove the E 53 - and it's really only equipped with Battery Hold, not a drive/charge such as the Volvo.

All the while I lugged around 3,000 lbs of dead battery weight while enjoying the Volvo PHEV system. I couldn't stop thinking about it and I was pissed at the functionality even if it did outweigh (no pun) what I never felt.

 

I clocked 9500 miles in four months in my E53 Hybrid. The EPA mileage estimate with a depleted battery is 23 mpg combined and 26 mpg highway. This is less than the EPA 25/31 combined/highway mpg for the E450.

According to the Trip Data for the last four months I have averaged 39.6 mpg (combined) and the electric driving ratio is 39%. I am not certain if this ratio is based on time lapsed or distance traveled. It would be interesting to compare the average mpg with a W214 E450 with similar mileage. I would estimate that 1/3 of the miles driven have been with a depleted battery. Even with a 0% SoC, when driving in Comfort mode, the engine cuts out on down grades and the electric motor displays short bursts of power consumption on the cockpit screen when driving on level ground.. With cruise control enabled, driving down hill charges the battery without applying the brakes..

On a recent 400 mile round trip between Cleveland and Detroit I used 6.45 gallons of gas in Comfort mode. For this particular trip I made one charging stop in each direction and did not drive much with 0% SoC. I rarely drive in EL mode. I prefer to use Comfort mode both locally and on the highway since more time is spent driving in 7th or 8th gear. For local driving the transmission rarely gets further than 4th gear.

I hope this real world data helps forum members understand what to expect with the E53 Hybrid.


Trip Data after 9500 miles in E53 Hybrid.

 

These results are very consistent with my X5 45e. Plug in hybrid is fantastic for the right use case.

 

The shorter the drive, the higher the mpg: If you limit yourself to 30 miles per day, charge overnight in theory you would never need to put a drop of gas in your E53.

The longer the drive, the worse your mpg, as once the battery is used up, you are relying on the ICE. As compared to the E450 the E53 weighs almost a 1000 lbs more. Carrying that extra dead weight burns up fuel.

My E450 on the open road, between 65 and 80 mph consistently gets between 32 and 33 mpg.

My point, if you care to consider it, is that for $18,000 more you get a bit more performance and zero gas used for 40/50 miles. If you take a trip, after 40/50 miles the performance, ride and mpg is worse in the E53 vs. E450.

If you think the extra "juice" for 30/40 miles is worth $18,000 go for it: I will stay with the E450 and wait for Mercedes to make either a hybrid, like a Prius or a EV with range more than 300 miles. The complexity and lack of reliability of the PHEV in general are other reasons I am avoiding the E53.

Finally, there is an old and true adage:


Just my $.02.

 

I will concede that the E53 Hybrid is not a perfect car. But I think you are over simplifying the comparison between the W214 E450 and the E53. Common sense may lead you to assume that after 30 or 40 miles you are left with a gas guzzler for the rest of the 300 mile trip. It might surprise you that it is not uncommon to drive 150 miles or more in "C" (Comfort) mode before the battery is fully depleted. The car seamlessly switches between electric and gas power and the mpkWh is substantially better with the transmission is 7th or 8th gear than when driving 35 mph in full EL mode with the transmission in 4th gear. Even after you reach 0% SoC the car will toggle between electric and gas mode for short periods.

This past weekend I did a 400 mile trip and used less than 6.5 gallons of gas. I think it would be possible to get 600 to 700 miles of range from one tank of gas if you are able to DC charge at half of your restroom and meal stops.

My 39.6 combined mpg mileage is better than the 32/33 highway mpg you report in your E450. Another bonus that E53 Hybrid owners will come to appreciate is the reduced wear of the brake pads and rotors due to recuperative braking. The savings in brake component replacement offsets some of the difference between the price of the E450 and E53.

 

When driving my AMG why in the world would I want to complicate my life by having to think about where to stop and charge my car? Simply not going to happen.

trying hard to leave politics aside but the EVS are absolutely positively not more eco-friendly and they are definitely not friendlier on your wallet.

 

What you are describing is not possible: The battery is less than 25 KW and the range is 40 to 50 miles. After that the battery is depleted. Once it is depleted if you continue to drive you are using the ICE which burns fuel. The E53 is nearly 1000 lbs. heavier than the E450, you have the weight of both the battery and the electric motor. That extra weight requires more fuel vs. the E450.

Brake pads: I have over 53,000 miles on my E450. About 40% of that mileage is highway. The front pads are original. The rear pads and rotors, because of the electronic parking brakes, had to be replaced at 35,000 miles. So the savings you mention are really dependent on how you drive. The E53 also has electonic rear parking brakes, so the replacement may be necessary as well.

 

Just dont drive like a little old lady and the fuel efficiently goes into "improbability drive"

 

Finding a place to charge a battery is not much different than finding a place to buy quality gasoline. Charging stations are plentiful.
Electricity quality is uniform while with gasoline one must pick and choose due to variations of octane, additives and potential impurities in the fuel.
As far as being eco-friendly, ICE vehicle's spread pollution everywhere they operate whereas the pollution from an EV is mainly at the battery's end of life.
A typical EV gets about 4 miles per kWH. At a cost of 14 cents per kWH fuel cost per mile is 3½ cents per mile. Gasoline costs several times more plus oil changes and tune-ups.
EV maintenance is also less expensive than ICE. There is no "engine" maintenance for an EV and battery warranties are about 8 years/100,000 miles.
Other maintenance items such as tires and brakes are similar to those for ICE cars.

 

Yeah, I always struggle to find that handle that says "Premium" at any name brand gas station anywhere in the nation.....it has prevented me from even making it down the block...and when we have hurricanes and no power for two to three weeks, yeah....somehow those pumps keep working trying to get me to fill up...and I just cant decide what handle to pick.....its crippling.

 

If you pinpoint focus on EV's, then yes, they're more eco friendly. But you are ignoring the sourcing of lithium, its processing, and toxic disposal--which we really won't experience for probably another 7 - 10 years. There have been several automotive articles on increased tire wear, which influences tire replacement and air pollution since the minute rubber particles that are released, at a higher rate, when driving add to pollution. Mayor Pete, when questioned about the increased electrical usage to charge a full EV every night, blew it off my saying it would be like adding another refrigerator to your home. So what does that do to electricity requirements in cities like L.A. that experience brown outs in hot weather. And how does that increase in electricity usage relate to oil/gas powered electrical generation and their pollution. Finally, finding charging stations. There was an epic story--think it was in the NYTimes--reporting on a few hundred mile drive in an EV. The reporter said it would typically take 2- 3 hours in an ICE car. but in the EV, due to the extra time to find a working charging station and then wait in line, took over 8 hours. I routinely travel from Maine to downstate NY. 320 miles, 6.5 hours. I can easily make that on a tank of gas with plenty reserve left. Can't with current EV's, and anything that increases my travel time above 6.5 hours is unacceptable. And as for access to charging stations, my nearest gas station is half mile away. The next nearest is 6 miles away and I have a choice of three different ones. The nearest charging station is 22 miles and it can handle only two vehicles at a time, assuming both stations are operative.

I can see a Miata sized fun car with maybe a 150 mile range (less batteries) being perfect as an EV. But as my primary vehicle? Nope.

 

During hurricane type weather or the power grid is down, I usually stay near home anyway. However, my home is equipped with a whole house generator and a Tesla Powerwall. I do not currently own an EV but my next car will definitely be a Mercedes EV. BTW when power was out last year during Debby, Helene and Milton most gas stations in my area were closed even though some were required to have a backup generator.

 

What's not possible? I did not say I got 150 miles driving solely on electric power. When running in Comfort mode at highway speeds, the mpkWh improves because the transmission is in a higher gear whenever the electric motor is engaged on level or downhill terrain. Once the battery is depleted, some charging occurs on downhill stretches and the electric motor continues to intermittently do some work. Your statement that, "Once it is depleted if you continue to drive you are using the ICE" is an over simplification of how a PHEV works and not accurate. In my case I was partially using ICE right from the start of a 400 mile round trip between Cleveland and Detroit. I started with a fully charged battery, conveniently charged once at a turnpike rest stop, used the complimentary charger at the hotel, charged once on the return trip rest stop, and filled up with 6.5 gallons of gas back in Cleveland. Even though you don't have any experience with the E53, you are asserting that what I observed is not possible.

With respect to the brakes, I can pretty much guarantee that you will not make it to the 100K mile mark on the front AND rear brakes which I am likely to reach in my E53. 53000 miles on the front brakes is only one data point. The measurements for brake pad and rotor thickness are needed to evaluate the actual condition of the brakes.The brake wear on an EV or PHEV does not depend much upon how the car is driven since 90% of the stopping power is recuperative braking. Little to no brake pad dust on the E53 wheels is evidence that very little friction braking occurs. The rear brake pad wear has nothing to do with the electric parking brake which is only engaged when the car is already stopped. If you are replacing the rear pads at 35K miles, then its probably because you have Lane Keep Assist toggled on and like cleaning brake pad dust off the rear wheels.

 

I'd ignore this jtk guy.

He doesn't own the E53 yet he feels comfortable disputing a statement of experience from an E53 owner without evidence of his own, instead relying on tendentious argumentation.