Hello & Current EV Owners worldwide - Would you Buy another EV?
Super Member
Joined: Jan 2022
Posts: 981
Likes: 555
Agree. I gotta admit how devastated I was initially when i tried to trade my EQS. Nobody wanted it, not Porsche, not Mercedes (three dealers). Carvana calculated for three days before finally making what turned out to be the best offer. Sometimes I think I should have just kept it, but I don't need or want three cars, and I only have a two car garage, so that was not really an option. It's a sad commentary on the current EV used market, which I hope will change as the industry realizes that the value of the battery is greater than they think it is in the long run. At least, that's what I believe and am hoping for. I, certainly, had seen no indication of any degradation of the capability of the car or battery during my three years with it. Someone who bought it got a fantastic car. So did I, BTW.....
Super Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 678
Likes: 258
23' EQS AMG
Let's do a side note for a moment: Comparing a depreciating asse, a vehicle, to real estate is not very accurate, and there are many pitfalls to this analogy. There are no jetson, either. When car's do fly, it will be 100% autonomous, and fewer people will actually have license to operating it. It seems that J_Boxer has broken down the vehicle paradigm into its basic definitions; that's great! The topic at hand is the battery technology evolution.
Let's talk about realistic battery evolution. Most public sentiments about EV are misaligned causing massive EV depreciation. We'll ignore the battery life and degradation since that has been settled.
Infrastructure. That's the cause.
Starting with today's electrical infrastructure, the maximum residential wattage delivery is about 19.2 kwh and 22kw which requires 3 phase. But typical max residential charge is 11kw. It doesn't matter if the EV architecture is 400v or 4000v. The damn thing will not charge any faster if the max infrastructure is only 11kw. So for residential charging (level 2), if you are happy with that now, you'll be just as happy with that 10 to 15 years from now assuming electrical codes will not change for residential. On he commercial side, you have MCS that can deliver megawatts, but realistically (foreseeable 10-15 years), your level 3 DCS will do 350kw, which, on a 800v architecture will charge from 5%-80%in about 20 minutes giving you a couple of hundred miles. At that point, time for gas fill up and recharge, assuming the infrastructure is equal, battery recharge tech has caught up to gas fill up. But it doesn't stop there. It will get better.
While the battery tech changes fast, the infrastructure does not. EV is depreciating not because of it's technology but because the infrastructure is not there to support it's technology. For example, while the EQS is on a 400v, the engineers can still make it charge quite fast on a 200kw DC charger, 10-80% in 30 minutes IF you connect to a 200+ kw charger. How many are those around and available now compared to 10 years from now? Let's say future MB architecture is built on 800V architecture, now you potentially cut the time down to say half (20 minutes). How about 1000V architecture like the Tesla Semi? Do you think we would go there to cut down more charging time to, say 5-10 minutes? How far would we go, or do we invent new batteries with greater energy density? For clues as to where MB is heading, read up on the AMG EVxx recent run and charging times.
You see, the public can conceive where the tech is going, but they overlook the infrastructure which is what is holding EV back. Similarly, we had to build smooth freeways to make way for more powerful engines. Because we can perceive battery tech potentials easily, we fear that it will change fast and become obsolete; therefore, we put less value into it. Simply put, the public experiences technological illiteracy or technophobia. Additionally, analogies to small electronic devices and devices that run on battery further misleads public sentiments and opinions.
Where there are fears, there are opportunities. As it stands now, there will be a future 800v+ architecture EV with a high energy density battery chemistry in my garage. I'm hoping it won't be too heavy.
ICE will be classics! I'll keep them in the separate garage when I want to smell the nostalgic oil and sound. 
Let's talk about realistic battery evolution. Most public sentiments about EV are misaligned causing massive EV depreciation. We'll ignore the battery life and degradation since that has been settled.
Infrastructure. That's the cause.
Starting with today's electrical infrastructure, the maximum residential wattage delivery is about 19.2 kwh and 22kw which requires 3 phase. But typical max residential charge is 11kw. It doesn't matter if the EV architecture is 400v or 4000v. The damn thing will not charge any faster if the max infrastructure is only 11kw. So for residential charging (level 2), if you are happy with that now, you'll be just as happy with that 10 to 15 years from now assuming electrical codes will not change for residential. On he commercial side, you have MCS that can deliver megawatts, but realistically (foreseeable 10-15 years), your level 3 DCS will do 350kw, which, on a 800v architecture will charge from 5%-80%in about 20 minutes giving you a couple of hundred miles. At that point, time for gas fill up and recharge, assuming the infrastructure is equal, battery recharge tech has caught up to gas fill up. But it doesn't stop there. It will get better.
While the battery tech changes fast, the infrastructure does not. EV is depreciating not because of it's technology but because the infrastructure is not there to support it's technology. For example, while the EQS is on a 400v, the engineers can still make it charge quite fast on a 200kw DC charger, 10-80% in 30 minutes IF you connect to a 200+ kw charger. How many are those around and available now compared to 10 years from now? Let's say future MB architecture is built on 800V architecture, now you potentially cut the time down to say half (20 minutes). How about 1000V architecture like the Tesla Semi? Do you think we would go there to cut down more charging time to, say 5-10 minutes? How far would we go, or do we invent new batteries with greater energy density? For clues as to where MB is heading, read up on the AMG EVxx recent run and charging times.
You see, the public can conceive where the tech is going, but they overlook the infrastructure which is what is holding EV back. Similarly, we had to build smooth freeways to make way for more powerful engines. Because we can perceive battery tech potentials easily, we fear that it will change fast and become obsolete; therefore, we put less value into it. Simply put, the public experiences technological illiteracy or technophobia. Additionally, analogies to small electronic devices and devices that run on battery further misleads public sentiments and opinions.
Where there are fears, there are opportunities. As it stands now, there will be a future 800v+ architecture EV with a high energy density battery chemistry in my garage. I'm hoping it won't be too heavy.
ICE will be classics! I'll keep them in the separate garage when I want to smell the nostalgic oil and sound.
Out Of Control!!
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 11,430
Likes: 5,338
From: San Francisco Bay Area
2019 C63CS
Infrastructure is absolutely a big piece of the puzzle, but comparing it to consumer electronics is quite relevant, IMO. Take smartphones for example. The first iPhone used EDGE, even though 3G was technically available, but the chipsets weren't very energy efficient, so battery life was an issue. Then 3G became widely used, but it wasn't until LTE that the apps and use cases for smartphones took off. LTE enabled a lot of applications for which 3G was just too slow. Now we are getting 5G and for the first time, the infrastructure is ahead of the curve. 5G is still kinda looking for the killer use case. There isn't much currently for which the latest LTE is too slow. I'm not even paying for a 5G plan at the moment, even though my phone is capable, but nothing I use my phone for on the go would really benefit from 5G and most of the day I'm on Wi-Fi with a 1 GB backbone anyway.
So yes, as long as the infrastructure is lagging behind, the products will suffer slow adoption. That's absolutely true.
So yes, as long as the infrastructure is lagging behind, the products will suffer slow adoption. That's absolutely true.
MBWorld God!
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 32,347
Likes: 6,320
Infrastructure is absolutely a big piece of the puzzle, but comparing it to consumer electronics is quite relevant, IMO. Take smartphones for example. The first iPhone used EDGE, even though 3G was technically available, but the chipsets weren't very energy efficient, so battery life was an issue. Then 3G became widely used, but it wasn't until LTE that the apps and use cases for smartphones took off. LTE enabled a lot of applications for which 3G was just too slow. Now we are getting 5G and for the first time, the infrastructure is ahead of the curve. 5G is still kinda looking for the killer use case. There isn't much currently for which the latest LTE is too slow. I'm not even paying for a 5G plan at the moment, even though my phone is capable, but nothing I use my phone for on the go would really benefit from 5G and most of the day I'm on Wi-Fi with a 1 GB backbone anyway.
So yes, as long as the infrastructure is lagging behind, the products will suffer slow adoption. That's absolutely true.
So yes, as long as the infrastructure is lagging behind, the products will suffer slow adoption. That's absolutely true.
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2025
Posts: 111
Likes: 67
2023 EQS 580 SUV, 2024 EQE 500 SUV, 2024 F150 King Ranch PowerBoost, 1997 BMW M3 Sedan
Gotta say, this thread is a welcome sight.
Let's be honest, the EQS subforum can get a little quiet sometimes. I've tried to kickstart a few conversations, but I can't be the only one stirring the pot—and my perspective certainly isn't the only one that matters. This back-and-forth right here is exactly the kind of thing I've been hoping to see more of: smart people with strong, well-argued opinions.
I know my own posts can get a bit academic and long-winded (believe me, I'm trying to evolve), so seeing a real debate like this is fantastic. Granted, I've got the U.S. Open on and I'm a few Dark 'n' Stormys deep, which could be why I'm waxing poetic. Or maybe I'm just talking out of my ***. Lol.
Speaking of which, this is one of the best articulations of the central conflict in EV ownership I've seen on any forum. The debate between @superswiss and @sarends is first-rate because they are both, from their own perspectives, entirely correct.
The confusion arises because everyone is trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, asking whether an EV is a "car" or a "gadget." The reality is that it's the first mainstream example of a new asset class: a Durable Good with a Consumer Electronics Core.
Think of it this way:
This isn't just a theory; it's the dynamic that perfectly explains the brutal, real-world $112k -> $33k depreciation that @hlothery bravely shared. The market wasn't pricing his car as a whole; it was pricing the perceived utility of its 3-year-old battery.
The best analogy is a professional digital camera. A $6,000 Canon camera body from 2015 is still a mechanical masterpiece, but its sensor and processor are ancient. Its resale value is a fraction of the original price, not because the body wore out, but because the electronics core became worthless. This is what's happening to EVs.
This framework explains everything discussed here:
The confusion in the market isn't about the quality of the cars. It's a temporary dislocation caused by a 100-year-old industry trying to value a 21st-century asset with 20th-century tools. The smart money isn't betting on 'car' vs. 'gadget'—it's capitalizing on the gap between the two.
Let's be honest, the EQS subforum can get a little quiet sometimes. I've tried to kickstart a few conversations, but I can't be the only one stirring the pot—and my perspective certainly isn't the only one that matters. This back-and-forth right here is exactly the kind of thing I've been hoping to see more of: smart people with strong, well-argued opinions.
I know my own posts can get a bit academic and long-winded (believe me, I'm trying to evolve), so seeing a real debate like this is fantastic. Granted, I've got the U.S. Open on and I'm a few Dark 'n' Stormys deep, which could be why I'm waxing poetic. Or maybe I'm just talking out of my ***. Lol.
Speaking of which, this is one of the best articulations of the central conflict in EV ownership I've seen on any forum. The debate between @superswiss and @sarends is first-rate because they are both, from their own perspectives, entirely correct.
The confusion arises because everyone is trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, asking whether an EV is a "car" or a "gadget." The reality is that it's the first mainstream example of a new asset class: a Durable Good with a Consumer Electronics Core.
Think of it this way:
- The Durable Good: The chassis, bodywork, suspension, brakes, and crash structures of an EQS are engineered to the same 15+ year lifespan as an S-Class. This is the world of automotive regulation, physical wear, and long-term utility. On this point, sarends is absolutely right—these are not disposable items.
- The Consumer Electronics Core: The battery pack, the management software, and the processor running the Hyperscreen are subject to the same brutal innovation cycle as a laptop or a smartphone. The battery's chemistry, density, and charging speed will be dramatically outpaced by new technology in 3-5 years. On this point, superswiss's financial analysis is spot on. This core component depreciates like a rock, just like all other consumer electronics.
This isn't just a theory; it's the dynamic that perfectly explains the brutal, real-world $112k -> $33k depreciation that @hlothery bravely shared. The market wasn't pricing his car as a whole; it was pricing the perceived utility of its 3-year-old battery.
The best analogy is a professional digital camera. A $6,000 Canon camera body from 2015 is still a mechanical masterpiece, but its sensor and processor are ancient. Its resale value is a fraction of the original price, not because the body wore out, but because the electronics core became worthless. This is what's happening to EVs.
This framework explains everything discussed here:
- Leasing a new EV is the ultimate hedge against the rapid depreciation of the electronics core. You're paying to use the latest tech without ever having to own the rapidly devaluing asset.
- Buying a CPO EV is a savvy move to acquire the high-quality durable good (the chassis and interior) after the market has already priced in the obsolescence of its electronics core—even though that core is still 95% as capable as it was on day one.
The confusion in the market isn't about the quality of the cars. It's a temporary dislocation caused by a 100-year-old industry trying to value a 21st-century asset with 20th-century tools. The smart money isn't betting on 'car' vs. 'gadget'—it's capitalizing on the gap between the two.
Super Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 678
Likes: 258
23' EQS AMG
Here is a link for light reading about automotive battery tech (ignore the company's promo) and a glimpse into the cutting edge technology of automotive battery and architecture; it's a stark difference from any previous small or medium battery devices such as a smartphone or robotics.
Tip of the iceberg:
https://www.tek.com/en/blog/resolvin...ertrain-design
Tip of the iceberg:
https://www.tek.com/en/blog/resolvin...ertrain-design
