From my experience with previous MB vehicles, fuel economy generally always exceeded stated EPA ranges, especially for diesel engines on the highway. I was curious how this would translate on the EQ-series vehicles, so here are my results, would love to hear how yours have fared:

For the EQE350V4 sedan: My work commute is 15 miles in each direction, with about 75%+ being highway driving. On average, the car is now forecasting between 354 and 365 miles on a full charge - significantly higher than the original factory-specified average. If I do some local errands, that number goes up as speeds are lower and I can take more advantage of regeneration. So far my consumption averages have been just around 300Wh/mi. That's also with A/C usage primarily on, given summer temperatures. How's everyone else averaging?

 

What is your driving style, aggressive or easy going? What speed do you drive on the highway? EVs are so smooth, and they make people tend to drive fast.

 

"From my experience with previous MB vehicles, fuel economy generally always exceeded stated EPA ranges, especially for diesel engines on the highway. I was curious how this would translate on the EQ-series vehicles, so here are my results, would love to hear how yours have fared:

For the EQE350V4 sedan: My work commute is 15 miles in each direction, with about 75%+ being highway driving. On average, the car is now forecasting between 354 and 365 miles on a full charge - significantly higher than the original factory-specified average. If I do some local errands, that number goes up as speeds are lower and I can take more advantage of regeneration. So far my consumption averages have been just around 300Wh/mi. That's also with A/C usage primarily on, given summer temperatures. How's everyone else averaging?"

A little confused by the forecast and the quoted 300Wh/mi. The 300 Wh/mi and a 90.6 kWh battery should give a range of 302 mi.

Keep in mind the EPA average also includes winter driving which will substantially reduce your mpkWh

 

@dtd , funny enough, I tended to push gasoline engines more than I now do the EV. At first, sure, big rush from the instant acceleration, but now I find myself being pretty laid back about it, the Wh/mi figure becomes an interesting self-regulation device if you watch it long enough. We produce our own power, so that in a way makes me want to drive efficiently even more, I know that sounds counterintuitive. @MBNUT1 , agreed, Wh/mi figure and range doesn't add up. However, the car seems adamant to produce a range figure between 350/360 miles. That's in part why I posted. I should say that for a lot of my commute, it consumes about 258-281 Wh/mi. The more I do my work commute lately, the happier the car seems to be. Long uninterrupted highway driving and very short trips do seem to drop the efficiency forecast a good bit.

 

your consumption is very close to EV database, the range their estimated is 295 mi
https://ev-database.org/imp/car/1899/Mercedes-EQE-350-4MATIC

https://ev-database.org/imp/car/1715/Mercedes-EQE-350-4MATIC

 

Not sure how you are getting your wh/mi number. Obviously the car is using a different one. We have a Kia Niro EV and I don't know how they come up with the value that it uses for the range estimate. Today it was using 4.54 mi/kWh for the range estimate. On the road we are getting about 4.3 so when my wife goes to visit her mom 90 miles away, I have to apply a correction factor to the range estimate. As I am typing this I suspect it is using recent commute averages.

 

@MBNUT1 , I use "From Reset" and "From Start" figures on the display. I reset "From Start" to spot check a trip, and leave "From Reset" alone for a longer while to get long-term averages. So, either the Wh/mi is overly pessimistic, or the percentage/range indicator is overly optimistic. One of these days I'll try do a "20% run" and see how many miles we got to see if I can compute it more accurately - though I'd still be depending on the computer to tell me the battery percentage.

 

How do you do tags? Do you just drag a members name into the post?

 

just use @ with member id will tag @MBNUT1

using up down on the left of the steering wheel between home and ok, there is one will shows wh/mi

 

Thanks @guess2098

 

When SOC was 80%, stated range was 282 miles. Now that the SOC is 62%, range of 214 miles implies total range of 345 miles! This data seems to validate what OP has stated.
(I picked up the car last Monday. I have driven a total of 724 miles with a reported average consumption of 29.3kWh/100 miles.)

 

@saintvir , your numbers seem to square with mine. Per same calculations, I often get between 345 and 366 miles of expected range. I almost always drive in the "no recuperation" mode, because it maximizes coasting.

Something else interesting to note: If you go to "Vehicle Status", and you look at "Brake" percentage, I've figured out that this percentage is only for the service brakes (disc brakes). It's fascinating to see the percentage of application in the different regen modes. This is to maximize the blending effect of regen with disc brakes. As an example, in "normal recuperation", as you start to gently apply pedal, the disc brake application goes up to 10% almost immediately. It gives the pedal a very linear feel, feels almost exactly like the brakes in a combustion car. However, in "no recuperation", the "brake percentage" stays at 1% or less, all the way until the pedal goes down significantly and it has to bring in the discs. You can feel a very slight sensation in the pedal when the disc brakes start to engage, as it artfully blends between the two. So, in a sense, "no recuperation" seems to, ironically, be the most efficient mode. It's essentially coasting as much as possible, followed by pure (minus 1%) regen until about the 50%+ mark, when the discs start to engage a bit. I have to say, the feeling of coasting in an EV is almost intoxicating at first, it feels impossible that there could be so little resistance. And when you coast on the highway, you really start to understand just how good the aerodynamic Cd is on these cars.

On a typical trip of mixed driving, I'm able to get about 293 to 285 Wh/mi, or 3.4 to 3.5 mi/kWh consistently, which I find to be quite efficient given the size, mass, and performance of the car. If you look at TFLEV's very recent coverage of a cannonball run, you'll see that a model 3 gets the same figures (they drove the speed limit). I know a lot of Tesla folks will say they get over 4 mi/kWh, but in that video series, over a 1950 mile journey, they averaged around 295 Wh/mi - in the same ballpark as an EQE sedan. There are some distinctions in the manual about which energy consumers are counted in which calculation - pre-entry climate control does not seem to be included, because the car is not in "ready" mode, as an example. But still, overall, I'm very pleased with the range of the car.

 

@bytemaster0
I have driven the car a total of 760 miles since I picked it up last week. Trip Data on the app says my average consumption was 3.4 mpkWh (essentially same as yours). I am pleasantly surprised with the car’s efficiency. I have mostly driven it with Intelligent Recuperation.

I haven’t tried No Recuperation but will give it a try next time I drive the car.

 

To give an impression on winter consumption: Last December, I had an EQE 500 on 19'' wheels with winter tires for a weekend and drove around 320km / 200 miles (60% Autobahn, 30% country roads, 10% city) and had a consumption of 270Wh/km = 430 Wh/mile. Outside temperatures were slightly above the freezing point, weather was dry, road not congested and two adults and a child including some luggage on board. Interior temperature was set to 20 deg centigrade or 68 deg Fahrenheit. Driving style was "typical German" (mostly 80 to 90 mph on the Autobahn, but over some stretches also Vmax = 130mph). Note that this was the version without DCU and heat pump. So with the models produced starting this summer wiinter consumption should be lower.

 

Well, everyone claims Mercedes is conservative in their range estimates but my experience with a 500 SUV makes the estimated 269 miles look somewhat liberal:

I really don't look at their estimated range at all. I just figure 10% is about 25 miles (26.3 to be exact). So if I leave home with 80% and want to make it back with 20% I actually have a 75 mile usable radius. That's 100% city driving too, as you can see by my average speed. I can only imagine how much worse those numbers will get when I take my EQE on a 2000 mile road trip at 70 mph. Imma scared!

 

Out of curiosity, how much joy do you get out of the accelerator with your 500? We just went on a 380-mile trip round trip in our 350V4 sedan, average speed 46 MPH and efficiency of 3.6 mi/kWh. My dad's 350X4 SUV got about 3.4 mi/kWh during the same trip.

 

I don't think I've put it in sport mode even once since I bought it. I'm also kind of over playing with the regen settings too. So my numbers are in comfort mode with standard regen and AC on. I find the maneuverability the torque and rear wheel steering give me to be fun anyways. Can zip ahead and in and out of traffic easily. And nobody better even waste their time trying to cut me off! Catch me if you can!

 

lower average is not always equal to more range. if you have a lot of stop and go, your consumption will be bad.
but if you unstop driving 25-30 miles, your range will increase.

 

I was actually surprised average was so low as it's 40 MPH out of my subdivision on Roman Forest Blvd, then 55 MPH on US 59 and if I hop a few exists on I-69 it's 65 MPH. The only thing I can figure is the amount of time I spend waiting at stoopid traffic lights around here, which I guess is infinity kWh per mile since I'm not moving. Have to say the built-in consumption charts really don't help much either. I just need an instantaneous "right now consumption" number.

 

on the left your steering wheel, next to the home button, there is up down left right, scrolling down to the current/average consumption circle. that will give you better idea about how much you are using right now.

 

I am wondering if this level of interest in power consumption is resulting from needing to recharge more often than anticipated? Other than watching the gauge much as we used to do when a fuel tank gauge approached empty, is there some reason to pay so much attention? I was hoping to just enjoy driving and plugging in every week or two when getting to 20% and not to think about it in-between.

 

For city driving it's working out fine for me. The range is enough to drive from one end of Houston to the other and back home without stopping to charge. Problem is road trips. For example, because I can't be sure I'll make it 240 miles to the EA charger in Mt. Pleasant, TX I'm going to have to drive 83 miles in the wrong direction to the EA chargers in Ennis, TX. So in addition to wasting time charging I'm wasting time driving additional miles. On that same stretch of road from Dallas to Little Rock there are two Tesla Supercharger locations. And just for giggles check out all the EA chargers between the MB Visitor's Center in Tuscaloosa and New Orleans (zero). That's my only other route. I really can't wait for the promised Tesla DC adapter...

 

... and as one YouTube reviewer put it (sorry dont remember which) it's just as much about "reliability anxiety" as range anxiety. Say I took the chance and drove 240 miles from New Caney to Mt. Pleasant and the EA chargers weren't working. I wouldn't have enough juice to make it anywhere else. I'd be stuck. So you kind of have to leave some buffer to be on the safe side which means even more stops to charge. Ugh! Makes me want to buy a FWD Prius hybrid with 600+ miles of range, seriously. Problem solved!

 

Makes sense...frequent way to deal with anxiety is to attempt to exert more control/focus. With your driving needs, longer range is quite important, but your prior comment about the city is comforting. Ioniq 6?

Thanks.

 

We've found that both my EQE 350V4 sedan and my dad's 350X4 SUV exceed 300 miles on a full charge. Realistically, that means around 200-250 if roadtripping efficiently during warmer months. I agree with many of the YouTubers that infrastructure is still abysmal. The NACS adapters may or may not be a solution - the Tesla cables are unlikely to reach our charge ports unless we do some acrobatics. Even then, they'll be facing the wrong side, which is sure to **** off Tesla drivers who have their ports on the left side. I'm not holding out much hope for Tesla charging infrastructure, to be completely honest. Instead, if you look at each state's NEVI proposals, the plans do look encouraging. Even here in Kentucky, there are some very solid plans for EV charging infrastructure both on highways and parkways. Yes, it'll take time, but it's coming. Even without NEVI, there's a lot of effort to get the infrastructure distributed and up to par. There will be a tipping point, and I think it's coming sooner than later. Tesla chargers will be a band-aid. All manufacturers are switching to the plug for purely perceptive reasons - by the time it's a relevant fact, other public infrastructure will have come a long way. From just the installations we see around where we live, it's coming fast. Let's all keep fingers crossed. We're in early-adopter stage, but it's not as much the wild west as it used to be.