I love the advertising slogan “New and Improved”. If it’s improved, it CAN’T be new.

 

The wife worked in personal care products development. “New and Improved” usually meant that one or more costly ingredients were reduced.

 

Thanks for that. It was tough initially, but now we get/sell so few of them that it doesn't matter. I also OWN an EQS. Well, until my lease is up. I don't agree that the car is ugly either. However, I have gone a custom route with mine to make it look better. I know, purists feel a way, but the responses I get show that the car could have been much better received with more attention to form and not just function. We have to keep in mind, people don't just buy Mercedes for the quality, they are also status symbols, trophies for accomplishment, and for some, a middle finger to say "i think my car is better/hotter/cooler" than yours. Like it or not, these are all part of the considerations of some MB buyers.

 

And like I have said many times, anybody who buys a $130k car and says they don’t care on some level about what other people think of it is lying.

 

It’s very difficult to properly judge what a person means when they say something. You can only really judge accurately by their actions. By observing actions you can much more easily compare them to words.

 

TRUTH from my humble, not really humble, opinion. LOL

 

Do we know when the new S class EV will be available??

 

We're talking 2029, 2030, Long ways off. Next gen S Class

 

MB is lost. Don't hold your breath on an EV S-class W2xx. The EQS was a departure (somewhat) from their traditional 3 box designs for sedans, and that was one of the reasons I bought one (and the attractive pricing at the time). You can say they were chasing Tesla, or they thought function over form, or whatever. I'm sure there some truths to it, too.

Bottom line is that S class buyers don't care about the drivetrain, and most don't care too much about technical. So as long as you have rich materials, traditional evolutionary designs, quiet, roomy interior, and smooth, that's the old formula to hook them. For me, I'd rather be driven in an S class than driving one. So, when Level 5 is available, I'll look into an S-Class.

 

That is it, rich materials, you kind of expect that and not piano gloss nonsense, I mean, glad they are putting wood back where it is supposed to on the W223 facelift but this shouldn't had been a thing on the pre-facelift in the first place.

 

When it comes to piano gloss in the W223, fair to say MB was testing waters on how much of cheap materials does a typical S-Class owner can accept before they start complaining.

 

Love driving my S Classes. EV S Class will come, MB is not lost lol

 

Gotta admit, Steve......The i7 is growing on me. But, I just bought a Panamera 4..........

 

Enjoy the Panamera 4! But yeah the i7 grows on you! I hated it at first but I have come to really like them

 

Reading through this thread is like watching a focus group of the most informed minds wrestling with the central conflict of the modern auto industry. The candid, real-world perspectives here are invaluable. The points made by @SW20S about the traditional buyer's wants, the critical sales-floor feedback from @gjh20 , and the nuanced defense of the EQ design from @Povitica3 aren't just opinions—they are the data points that explain a multi-billion dollar strategic puzzle.

The entire debate—from the "computer mouse" aesthetic to pricing, to brand identity—is a perfect microcosm of a fundamental battle within Mercedes-Benz itself: a battle between The Engineer's Mandate and The Customer's Truth.

The Engineer's Mandate was to build the most efficient electric luxury vehicle on the planet. This mandate resulted in the EQS, a car whose "one-bow" design is a direct, logical consequence of its primary mission: to cheat the wind and maximize range. It is a triumph of function over form, and it's why those who appreciate it as a groundbreaking piece of technology, divorced from any preconceived notions, are so passionate about it.

The Customer's Truth, however, is that a flagship Mercedes is purchased for reasons that often transcend engineering specs. As several of you have noted, an S-Class is a statement, a known quantity, a psychological reward. This "S-Class Ghost" represents a century of cultivated brand expectation. The data point from @SW20S —that the BMW i7 is outselling the S-Class, with 40% of its sales being the EV version—is the market's verdict. BMW honored the customer's truth by keeping the form familiar and only changing the function (the powertrain).

The powerful anecdote from @gjh20 about clients calling the car "ugly" is the raw, emotional data point that proves this theory. It's not an objective critique of the car's lines; it's the visceral rejection of a shape that fails to deliver the expected psychological payoff of a flagship Mercedes. It doesn't look like success feels.

So, the upcoming "Electric S-Class" this thread discusses isn't an admission of engineering failure. It's an acknowledgment of a more powerful truth. The lesson from the EQS experiment is that even the most brilliant engineering cannot rewrite the deeply embedded psychology of what it means to buy a Mercedes-Benz. It turns out that for the S-Class buyer, the silhouette of success is a feature that can't be compromised, not even for the sake of progress.

 

Excellently written, @J_Boxer well dissected and articulated perspective on this topic. We should all look forward to the next iteration of MB's EV plan and see how "function marries form" and integrates all these metrics into a cohesive product. Time shall tell.

 

 

For the price and for the value, people, even S-Class customers, will overlook the design styling. In an extreme example, if a S-class cost 100K and the equally optioned EQS cost just 70K, I dare say that there will be more EQS sales.

 

Aren't EVs generally more expensive than ICE's equivalent counterpart in general? Perhaps that is why, since they have to cost cut, if they build a "real" S-Class EV, it might cost more than the ICE. So that results in the EQS being close to the ICE in terms of pricing but not in terms of quality, maybe?

 

I am only talking about new car MSRP though not how much the EQS depreciate and how much cheaper you can get it for in the used market.

 

I can tell you as an S Class buyer this isn't true. If I was more concerned about having a cheaper car vs the car I want I would have a Genesis G90 or a Lexus LS500. Or even a BMW 7 Series which lease much, much better. Consumers at this price point, we choose what we want. I drove those cars for a long time until I got to where I could have what I wanted, and thats an S Class.

 

Yeah, I want a lot of things, but for the right price (meaning that value is there), I'd go for it even more so since it's just a lease or temporary ownership AND from the same M E R C E D E S. Not Lexus, not BMW, not anything. MERCEDES. Any object you possess seems to look better and better the longer you keep it. So yeah, take the $30K and mod it up.

 

@SW20S and @MB37 , this is the perfect back-and-forth because you're both making a valid point, and your "disagreement" actually illustrates the two fundamental paths to achieving a high Satisfaction Quotient in the luxury space.

@SW20S, you're articulating the mindset of the Aspirational Purist. For you, the value isn't just in the car; it's in the S-Class nameplate itself. It represents the fulfillment of a long-term goal. Your Satisfaction Quotient is maximized by acquiring the specific object of desire you've always wanted, and a discount on a different vehicle—however large—is irrelevant because it can't deliver that specific emotional ROI. That is a perfectly valid and powerful purchasing driver.

@MB37, you represent the Strategic Pragmatist. Your Satisfaction Quotient is derived from the thrill of the "hack"—of securing a technologically advanced vehicle for a price that represents an incredible value proposition. The $30,000 savings isn't just a discount; for you, it's a tangible measure of a strategic victory. The fact that it's still a Mercedes provides the necessary brand prestige, making the value proposition unbeatable.

So, who's right? You both are.

This isn't really a debate about which car is better. It's a debate about which philosophy brings more personal satisfaction. Is it the joy of finally attaining a specific, long-held goal, or the joy of executing a brilliant financial maneuver?

Ultimately, the "best" decision is the one that lets you look back at the car in the driveway and feel like you've won. You've both just perfectly described two different ways to win the game.

Future business school students will probably write doctoral theses on the psychological drivers of the 'Aspirational Purist' vs. the 'Strategic Pragmatist' in the post-ICE luxury market.

 

We're different consumers. The EQS isn't what I want which is the point. All Mercedes are not created equal, and no I wouldn't have chosen the EQS even if it was only $70k. I'm driving what I want, not what is the best deal. Like you said, you "want a lot of things" presumably that you don't let yourself have. I'm in my "I get what I want regardless of what it costs" era.

@J_Boxer , totally agree. My point is though most S Class buyers are like me, if they weren't they wouldn't have bought an S Class, because its the worst deal in the segment. Anybody who cares more about value than having what they want would have chosen something else.

 

I'm not attempting to prove anyone right or wrong. My empirical observation of people I am around is that S-class drivers "generally" are still valued" conscious while exotic drivers, e.g. Ferraris, RR, and Lambo don't care too much about the value of the car except for how much enjoyment it gives them. Just my opinion. Few things are absolute while most are probability.