They all have the same 90.6 kWh battery. EQE350V4 has longer range than EQE500V4. Difference is in motor speed controllers and potentially the motors.

In retrospect - we may be talking about two different vehicles. For some reason the SUV range estimates look different (in vehicle model order) than the sedan's range estimates.

 

It's a 100 kWh battery, 90.6 "usable" and 9.4 buffer. In any case, this is a thread about acceleration so range be damned! 633 lb-ft torque and only 400 HP? Somethang don't add up... I can actually feel the limiter kicking in. It's like all that "oomph" it has off the line just suddenly drains out.

 

The 500V4 is still faster than the 350V4 even when you unlock the acceleration. The 0-60, in multiple videos, is 3.8 sec on the 500.
The range of the 350V4 is better than the 500V4. Now the question is thr 500 worth the extra money if the 350 is 4.5 sec with acceleration fee?

 

I found this model comparison in the 2023 Order Guide. I was referring to these battery sizes, but I'm not sure how significant this is. But, it does seem the 350 X4 with the acceleration package would have the shortest range by a greater margin than it now does?
​​​​​​EQE350X 

Performance & Handling

● Adjustable Regenerative Braking with Steering Wheel Paddles

● 90.6 kWh High Voltage Battery

● DYNAMIC SELECT (B59)

● 170 kW DC Fast Charging

EQE350X4 

Performance & Handling

● Adjustable Regenerative Braking with Steering Wheel Paddles

● 89 kWh High Voltage Battery

● DYNAMIC SELECT (B59)

● 170 kW DC Fast Charging


EQE500X4 

Performance & Handling

● Adjustable Regenerative Braking with Steering Wheel Paddles

● 90.6 kWh High Voltage Battery

● DYNAMIC SELECT (B59)

● 170 kW DC Fast Charging

● AMG Line Exterior Package

 

The MB order guide has different information. The 500 wins by 16 miles.

EQE350X4 

Powertrain

Powertrain Dual Permanently Synchronous Electric Motors with 215 kW Total Output

Power 288 Horsepower

Torque 564 lb-ft of Torque

Interior Dimensions

Head Room Front 39.5 in

Leg Room, Driver 40.6 in

Elbow Room, Front TBD

Hip Room, Front 56.5 in

Shoulder Room, Front 58.9 in

Head Room Rear 39.4 in

Leg Room, Rear 40.6 in

Elbow Room, Rear TBD

Shoulder Room, Rear TBD

Drivetrain and Battery

Drive Configuration 4MATIC All-Wheel Drive

Battery Size 89 kWh Lithium-Ion Battery

Suspension Comfort Suspension w/ Selective Damping

Number of High-Voltage Modules 10

AC Charging Capacity (240V) 9.6 kW

AC Charging Time (240V) 9.5 hours (10-100% SOC) 10.75h (0-100% SOC)

DC Fast Charging Capacity 170 kW

DC Fast Charging Time 32 minutes (10-80%)

Range & Efficiency

Efficiency Figures 42 kWh / 100mi

City/Hwy MPGe 82 city / 79 hwy / 81 comb MPGe

EPA-Certified Range 253 (w/ All-Season Tires)

EQE500X4 
Powertrain

Powertrain Dual Permanently Synchronous Electric Motors with 300 kW Output

Power 402 Horsepower

Torque 633 lb-ft of Torque

Interior Dimensions

Head Room Front 39.5 in

Leg Room, Driver 40.6 in

Elbow Room, Front TBD

Hip Room, Front 56.5 in

Shoulder Room, Front 58.9 in

Head Room Rear 39.4 in

Leg Room, Rear 40.6 in

Elbow Room, Rear TBD

Shoulder Room, Rear TBD

Drivetrain and Battery

Drive Configuration 4MATIC All-Wheel Drive

Battery Size 90.6 kWh Lithium-Ion Battery

Suspension Comfort Suspension w/ Selective Damping

Number of High-Voltage Modules 10

AC Charging Capacity (240V) 9.6 kW

AC Charging Time (240V) 9.5 hours (10-100% SOC) 10.75h (0-100% SOC)

DC Fast Charging Capacity 170 kW

DC Fast Charging Time 32 minutes (10-80%)

Range & Efficiency

Efficiency Figures 38 kWh / 100 mi

City/Hwy MPGe 91 city / 86 hwy / 89 comb MPGe

EPA-Certified Range 269 mi

 

Well, if the 500 has more power and more range why would anyone buy the 350?

 

Doesn't matter because range when doing 0-60 runs is 113 miles. And I didn't just make that number up.

Anywhosies, point is we all want MOAR POWAH! I paid EQS 450 money for my EQE 500 and no acceleration increase for me. They're like the EV version of Seinfeld's soup ****.

 

The different battery sizes are due to different battery supplies sources.
It would vary depending on which suppliers on that batch, they consider the difference insignificant.

The range is hard to compare as they use different tires for EPA testing!
The longer range is done using optimized summer tire, while the other uses all season tires.

Anyways, the acceleration increase was stated as not having any effect on the range.

 

The acceleration increase for the 350 is only possible because it was intentionally crippled in the first place.
There is no acceleration increase for 500 because it is already as fast as it was designed. No intentional crippling, no acceleration increase.

 

They sold me the AMG look with my fancy 21" AMG rims and now I want AMG fast, as the EQE 500 was designed to be. It's just a more grown-up version without all the childish spaceship noises the EQE AMG makes.

 

Yup just like phones or any battery powered device, kind of like the lottery, if you got the one with the higher actual capacity vs rated or designed then good for you.

 

So, I did some more "empirical testing" today, and charged up my battery to 96% (highest I've ever charged) before doing a couple more pulls. It definitely seems that the inverters are power-limited, independently of the state of charge. Granted, it was a bit hotter outside than last test, but I kept the AC off just to remove any additional heat making into the cooling loop. Fastest 0-60 pull was 4.49 seconds at 95% charge, last time I tried with 72% I got 4.50. Including both directions, right at 4.56 seconds 0-60 average. So, it looks like state of charge isn't limiting things here, at least in the upper range of the battery, which is good! I'd also put on 2500 more miles on the car. The 0.01 second difference is, I'm sure, within the margin of error for the race computer, so as near as makes no difference, it's the same.

 

I see. Thanks for the update.

 

Just subscribed and it’s a free first month… trial period. Then $60 a month. They know that once you try it you’ll be hooked !!! It’s awesome but I wish it would be included especially since there is no cost to MB.

 

Well, they are argue the cost is additional wear and tear of the motors leading to potential higher/more frequent repair cost under warranty but it is probably minimal.

How do you find it so far?

 

BTW, though its a European-only thing, if you look at the specs for the AMG 43 variant, it has an IDENTICAL 633 ftlb (858 nm to be exact) torque as my 500. The difference is it has 469 HP and my 500 has 402 HP. So I'm not so sure the 43 is the "detuned" one. I mean, it's not like AMG actually does anything to the motors. It's all just software.

 

The 63s have custom motors. If you look at the kW rating, they are different. However, all the other cars have the same motors, at least from the kW power rating. The differences are in the traction inverters and to some extent the cooling.

 

I'm just curious to find out from those who purchased the acceleration package if it impacted your average range. Obviously, you will use more battery if you are rapidly accelerating all of the time, but for normal daily driving, does it impact the range? Someone commented that it isn't supposed to impact range, but I am curious to find out what everyone's actual experience is. I'm mostly concerned what the impact will be for longer trips where I may need the full range. If I drive in eco mode, can I expect a similar range to a EQE without the acceleration package?

 

Wont' have any effect whatsoever unless you push the accelerator to the point where the boost kicks in. In other words, if you keep your power application to below 80%, you won't be engaging the boost at all. I like to extend my range, so I drive pretty gently for most cases unless I need the boost. Most of my acceleration is between 20-30% power. So, the boost won't even activate at those power ratings, so it won't affect your range. When in warmer weather in mixed driving, I can get about 268 Wh/mi. Most 70 MPH road trips get me about 289 Wh/mi or so, sometimes higher, sometimes lower. Of course, your mileage may vary. But that's still 3.5-3.6 mi/kWh, so the boost hasn't dropped it any. Predicted range in warmer weather is about 353 miles (doubtful you'd fully get that range, but 330 is not at all out of the question and is in line with Consumer Reports' findings) even with the boost upgrade.

Last comparison on this, my dad's EQE350X4 SUV doesn't have the acceleration increase, but his average economy is still lower than my sedan's that does have the acceleration increase. That's to be expected because the SUV is less aerodynamic than the sedan (even though he has a front-axle DCU). If acceleration boost were impacting it, I'd expect worse performance, but that's not the case.

 

If itt impacts the range it’s not noticeable. There are other factors that impact range way more like weather, tires, driving habits and climate control. I would not worry about range when purchasing this service.

 

I went through with the purchase and am happy with the noticeable increase in horsepower. I have had it for about a month and have not seen any dramatic effect on range.