When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Just joined the forum. Bought 2 cars 3 weeks ago - I drive the EQS 580 and my wife got the EQS 580 SUV. I just came out of a Porsche Taycan 4S to get a better ride, tech and (I assumed) about 100 miles more range. I haven't figured out the range yet. Mercedes advertises 340 miles on 100% charge on the 580 sedan, 285 on the SUV. I'm going to show some pics of what I normally see. I charged to 100%, garage temp 52F, outside temp 34F. This gets me the following:Min - 219, Max - 337, Actual 280 After driving 1 mile, the numbers areMin - 219, Max - 334, Actual 259This means I lost 21 miles of actual range in just 1 mile. After driving 13 miles to my destinationMin - 204, Max - 313, Actual 249This means I lost 31 miles of range in 13 miles, or an actual loss of 18 miles of range. After completing my 26 mile round tripMin - 193, Max - 294, Actual 230This means I lost 50 miles or range in 26 miles or an actual loss of 24 miles or range. My speed to destination was about 68 mph in comfort mode, nearly all highway. While I see 337 miles as an estimate of the "Max" miles I can achieve, I can't figure out how a normal driver can achieve that range. I'd love to have an explanation. If 280 is the "real world" range for an EQS 580, I've only gained 40 miles against the Porsche. The Porsche was exact. There wasn't a minimum or maximum and then "what you're gonna get..." number. If 280 is what an EQS driver can expect, than we've all bit on false advertising from Mercedes - unless I'm missing something. Thanks, in advance, for any help on this. In the garage prior to departure at 100% charge.After driving 1 mile.After driving 13 milesAfter 26 miles, back in the garage.
The max is with the climate control in the most energy efficient setting..... or off. Something you will never use in cold weather since it turns off the compressor and your window will instantly fog up. It might be useful in the desert summer, but completely useless in winter.
Just joined the forum. Bought 2 cars 3 weeks ago - I drive the EQS 580 and my wife got the EQS 580 SUV. I just came out of a Porsche Taycan 4S to get a better ride, tech and (I assumed) about 100 miles more range. I haven't figured out the range yet. Mercedes advertises 340 miles on 100% charge on the 580 sedan, 285 on the SUV. I'm going to show some pics of what I normally see. I charged to 100%, garage temp 52F, outside temp 34F. This gets me the following:
Min - 219, Max - 337, Actual 280
After driving 1 mile, the numbers are
Min - 219, Max - 334, Actual 259
This means I lost 21 miles of actual range in just 1 mile.
After driving 13 miles to my destination
Min - 204, Max - 313, Actual 249
This means I lost 31 miles of range in 13 miles, or an actual loss of 18 miles of range.
After completing my 26 mile round trip
Min - 193, Max - 294, Actual 230
This means I lost 50 miles or range in 26 miles or an actual loss of 24 miles or range.
My speed to destination was about 68 mph in comfort mode, nearly all highway. While I see 337 miles as an estimate of the "Max" miles I can achieve, I can't figure out how a normal driver can achieve that range. I'd love to have an explanation. If 280 is the "real world" range for an EQS 580, I've only gained 40 miles against the Porsche. The Porsche was exact. There wasn't a minimum or maximum and then "what you're gonna get..." number. If 280 is what an EQS driver can expect, than we've all bit on false advertising from Mercedes - unless I'm missing something.
Thanks, in advance, for any help on this.
In the garage prior to departure at 100% charge. After driving 1 mile. After driving 13 miles After 26 miles, back in the garage.
The max advertised number is if you go to the EQS screen and enact all efficiency measures (Eco mode, Eco ++ HVAC mode or off, etc). The actual range was maxed by outlets like Edmunds with near-ideal driving conditions (78F, flat loop, steady 70 or 75 MPH speed). Look for better than 340 miles range in the Summer, assuming you don’t live in the upper reaches of the continent.
Just joined the forum. Bought 2 cars 3 weeks ago - I drive the EQS 580 and my wife got the EQS 580 SUV. I just came out of a Porsche Taycan 4S to get a better ride, tech and (I assumed) about 100 miles more range. I haven't figured out the range yet. Mercedes advertises 340 miles on 100% charge on the 580 sedan, 285 on the SUV. I'm going to show some pics of what I normally see. I charged to 100%, garage temp 52F, outside temp 34F. This gets me the following:
Min - 219, Max - 337, Actual 280
After driving 1 mile, the numbers are
Min - 219, Max - 334, Actual 259
This means I lost 21 miles of actual range in just 1 mile.
After driving 13 miles to my destination
Min - 204, Max - 313, Actual 249
This means I lost 31 miles of range in 13 miles, or an actual loss of 18 miles of range.
After completing my 26 mile round trip
Min - 193, Max - 294, Actual 230
This means I lost 50 miles or range in 26 miles or an actual loss of 24 miles or range.
My speed to destination was about 68 mph in comfort mode, nearly all highway. While I see 337 miles as an estimate of the "Max" miles I can achieve, I can't figure out how a normal driver can achieve that range. I'd love to have an explanation. If 280 is the "real world" range for an EQS 580, I've only gained 40 miles against the Porsche. The Porsche was exact. There wasn't a minimum or maximum and then "what you're gonna get..." number. If 280 is what an EQS driver can expect, than we've all bit on false advertising from Mercedes - unless I'm missing something.
Thanks, in advance, for any help on this.
In the garage prior to departure at 100% charge. After driving 1 mile. After driving 13 miles After 26 miles, back in the garage.
Outside temperature of 34 to 42 degrees is still rather cold for the HV battery. The inside temperature you set makes a big difference as c4004matic has stated. Setting it to 65-66 degrees heya lot. Additionally, 68 mph is too fast for the optimal range.
You’ll find out that the range shoots up dramatically when temperatures reach the 50s, 60s, 70s, or warmer. See my example above. Thus from about mid April through early or mid October your range will be much higher. The greatest range I achieved was 480 miles back in the summer with temperatures in the 80s to low 90s. That was mostly city driving.
Outside temperature of 34 to 42 degrees is still rather cold for the HV battery. The inside temperature you set makes a big difference as c4004matic has stated. Setting it to 65-66 degrees heya lot. Additionally, 68 mph is too fast for the optimal range. You’ll find out that the range shoots up dramatically when temperatures reach the 50s, 60s, 70s, or warmer. See my example above. Thus from about mid April through early or mid October your range will be much higher. The greatest range I achieved was 480 miles back in the summer with temperatures in the 80s to low 90s. That was mostly city driving.
Imagine how bad your range would have been in the Taycan under similar temps. About 120 miles or so!
Quick question:
When the members talk about range here, are they referring to actual miles (from the odometer) on a charge (% to % of charge number of miles),
OR
the range that the computer says is expected?
On my prior gas cars, if the computer says I am getting 26.2MPG, I assume it to be accurate. On the EQS, when it shows my estimated range, I only expect it to be an estimate. I would think you would have to charge to a set percent and then reset the trip odometer and state the actual miles between the 2 states of charge (starting and ending).
From my perspective as a one-year owner driver (less than 4,000 miles). I'm guessing that nearly all the range data put up here comes from the car's calculations rather than from an odometer check.
Since it changes as you drive the computer must take into account the current rate of driving and the temperature. Sitting static in your garage is just a guestimate until you actually get on the road.
Quick question:When the members talk about range here, are they referring to actual miles (from the odometer) on a charge (% to % of charge number of miles),ORthe range that the computer says is expected? On my prior gas cars, if the computer says I am getting 26.2MPG, I assume it to be accurate. On the EQS, when it shows my estimated range, I only expect it to be an estimate. I would think you would have to charge to a set percent and then reset the trip odometer and state the actual miles between the 2 states of charge (starting and ending). Am I correct? Are there different methods?
you will not get mpg. What you will get is an average watts/ mile. When you charge your estimated miles will reset using SOC (state of chrage) AKA amount of electricity in the battery and the previous battery consumption. Once you get going again it will recalculate using your present avg consumption. It is very accurate. Ignore the max range since its a bigger guess that depends on a slower speed blunting climate control and so on.
you will not get mpg. What you will get is an average watts/ mile. When you charge your estimated miles will reset using SOC (state of chrage) AKA amount of electricity in the battery and the previous battery consumption. Once you get going again it will recalculate using your present avg consumption. It is very accurate. Ignore the max range since its a bigger guess that depends on a slower speed blunting climate control and so on.
I've had my car since early August and am still learning and figuring things out. Thanks all for your help on the various threads.
To me, I trusted the old MPG shown on all of my recent car's computers. If you didn't check the odometer, when you fill up with gas, you could multiply the MPG x the gallons filled and get a good value of the miles driven or range. The MPG is a result of the miles you drive vs the consumption. On the EQS, the range displayed is for your future trip. It does not know the future temperature, climate control or massage usage, amount of inclines or hills, style of driving, or amount of traffic. From what I see, it starts out (after a charge) to show an exaggerated range and then settles into a good estimation, but....
I only bring this up because some members charge in their warm garages (or maybe not warm) or a fast EA charger.
This thread is called Cold Weather Range, and for that purpose the only way to be accurate is to state the percent of charge, and ending percent, and actual miles driven and in this case conditions (temp). I may be wrong, but that is why I posted, to clarify.
I read a article last year on hypermiling that stated the average EV got its best mileage vs time at 28 mph…..😊
I think that is one reason why I get such fantastic mpkWh readings each day on my way back from the golf course. In addition to my house being about 900ft lower in elevation than the golf course, in 25 miles, I am moving at very slow speeds for about half the distance in heavy traffic when I am coming home. Using strong regen, with these slow speeds, I get some fantastic numbers. Not so much when I drive the same route to the course in the morning with less traffic. Add cole weather, and the numbers drop significantly.
I am now on my second EQS 580 in my second winter driving (finally the custom ordered arrived). The estimated range at departure is roughly an estimate based on that day's weather - the algorithm incorporates outside temp for the area. In my experience it is fairly good in its prediction, but as already posted the range will adjust as you drive. After about 20-30 miles driving - and presuming nothing changes in terms of weather / speed - it is spot on. @Old Rocker you can trust the algorithm just the way you trusted your gas car. The miles per gallon changed as you were driving, the stabilized. Pretty much the same with the EV range prediction @Mike2035 the reason you are "losing" range so fast is because you started with a cold battery. Use the preconditioning while connected to the charger, the battery will be warmer and range "loss" substantially reduced. Best is if you just finished charging before departure, that guarantees a warm battery.
Re vs. Taycan 4S the EQS sedan range is better, but not by a large margin. The Porsche EPA was ridiculously underestimation of true range. See my previous post here for the comparison EQS580-Tesla-Taycan 4S
- and presuming nothing changes in terms of weather / speed - it is spot on. @Old Rocker you can trust the algorithm just the way you trusted your gas car. The miles per gallon changed as you were driving, the stabilized. Pretty much the same with the EV range prediction
Great post. Lots of other civil comments too. My 2 points are that picturing in your mind what to expect is different for a gas or electric car. Once we are used to them and what to expect they will be second nature to us. Even on some recent trips in my old gas car I had some long stretches where I did not see a gas station for a very long time. It is possible that there were some fairly close by if I searched with the NAV, but I did not have any anxiety because I knew there were cities coming up.
For the record, if something happened to my car and I had to replace it, I would still choose an EQS.
Long term we do wish to know the rate of usage (MPG or watts/mile) and safely usable range. The post I quoted above correctly stated we can trust the estimated numbers the car shows (after a brief settling in) and I do. But some of the numbers are actual (consumption and miles driven) and some are estimates (expected range). One member posted his numbers where one way he had a mostly incline, and the other way he had mostly down hill.
My second point is that these discussions are great for comparing and learning about our cars, but I think it is important that the data is conveyed in the same way (car's computer estimate or actual miles driven).
I am guessing Mercedes owners are less concerned with MPG then range, but ultimately we choose some measurement that helps us decide how we are doing of if we feel comfortable about our trip.
I don't think there is a way to do pre-conditioning before charging at home. This should not matter too much since charging takes a long time anyway...
So can I assume there is no way to precondition the battery when charging at home?
I asked same question in another thread. I tried to find out info from the manual but couldn’t find any mention of preconditioning the battery. One reply I got was you can’t just turn on precondition of battery. You have to put it in destination of nav and it has to be a dc charger. Then it automatically preconditions the batteries. The answer I got about home charging was it wasn’t necessary on a home level 2 AC charger.
I don't think there is a way to do pre-conditioning before charging at home. This should not matter too much since charging takes a long time anyway...
Not only because it takes a long time but (as Radman991 says) because the car takes all the current the home charger can provide irrespective of the battery condition (temperature, even SOC).
Charging a car parked outside at extreme cold would need battery heating but it would not be preconditioning (not after a trip and anyway better to heat with power from the home charger instead of power from the cold battery).
Even the hybrid 223 charges at full 11 kW on my home charger without any preconditioning, even if the battery is less than one third of the EQS.
Not only because it takes a long time but (as Radman991 says) because the car takes all the current the home charger can provide irrespective of the battery condition (temperature, even SOC). Charging a car parked outside at extreme cold would need battery heating but it would not be preconditioning (not after a trip and anyway better to heat with power from the home charger instead of power from the cold battery). Even the hybrid 223 charges at full 11 kW on my home charger without any preconditioning, even if the battery is less than one third of the EQS.
I wish we had 11kw chargers here . All we get as a 9.5 one. I know 1.5 KW doesn't seem like much, but any faster charging would be welcome.
I wish we had 11kw chargers here . All we get as a 9.5 one. I know 1.5 KW doesn't seem like much, but any faster charging would be welcome.
Right, thanks to our 3-phase supply (230/400 V), EQS can even have the 22 kW AC charger option (I don't think it is available for the 223). Not all private houses have fuses to support a 32 A three phase plug though.
Because of the different plug, I guess it doesn't help if someone built a local 3 phase source. Quite feasible with modern switching supplies as long as the source has sufficient wattage.
I think that is one reason why I get such fantastic mpkWh readings each day on my way back from the golf course. In addition to my house being about 900ft lower in elevation than the golf course, in 25 miles, I am moving at very slow speeds for about half the distance in heavy traffic when I am coming home. Using strong regen, with these slow speeds, I get some fantastic numbers. Not so much when I drive the same route to the course in the morning with less traffic. Add cole weather, and the numbers drop significantly.
4.5 mpkwh would translate to 3.4 mpkwh.on level ground.
4.5 mpkwh would translate to 3.4 mpkwh.on level ground.
So, you believe 900ft of elevation in 23 miles makes that big a difference? Not sure I trust your numbers. I'm averaging almost that much driving to the course, 900ft uphill in 23 miles. I would suggest the speed and traffic differences, and the time I'm in strong vs normal regen have more to do with it. But, I'm not a mathemetician. All I know is, I love the car.
The Potential Energy of 5600 lb raised by 900 ft is ~ 5 e6 ft-lb. 1 ft-lb equals 3.76616e-7 kWh. This translates to 1.89 kWh. Averaging of 4.5 mpkWh over 25 miles is a total of 5.56 kWh. Adding in the 1.89 kWh provided by gravity gives a total of 7.45 kWh required to cover that distance without the gravity adder, yielding 3.35 mpkWh on level ground.
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.
