Meet the V8 Powered PHEV Mercedes-AMG SL 63 S E

[Bogeyman]

What are they thinking? Where are they going with this? Do they have a plan?

As a long time owner of SLs, this makes me throw up in my mouth...

https://mbworld.org/how-tos/slideshows/meet-the-v8-powered-phev-mercedes-amg-sl-63-s-e-957447

 

[gsxr]

I like the numbers! Not so sure about the nose job though.

"The SL 63 S E Performance impresses with its 4.0-liter V8 engine that generates 604 horsepower and 627 lb-ft of torque on gasoline alone. With an additional 201 horsepower from its electric motor, the total system output peaks at a staggering 805 horsepower and 1,047 lb-ft of torque, propelling the car from 0 to 62 mph in just 2.9 seconds, with a top speed of 197 mph."​

However - I thought MB was abandoning all ICE's and especially the pollution-spewing V8/V12 engines, while moving to all-electric motorvation. What's with this 98%-ICE hybrid stuff?

 

[Bogeyman]

Yeah, just don't race a Cyber Truck or a Plaid or a Burberry or whatever they call their latest Voltmobile.

 

[dionphaneuf]

I think this is a similar pwt as in the S580e that gets good reviews. I'm sure it'll be solid....but man, I would not want to own a car w a hot v twin turbo v8 and an EV powertrain.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a45654471/2023-mercedes-benz-s580e-phev-test/

I'm probably in the minority here but the modern spirit of the SL does lend itself well to electrification (*ducks for cover*). It'd be cool to have a smooth, quiet roadster that's plenty fast and could waft in comfort in (tho you'd lose the v8 warble). That said, Mercedes hasn't done a good job carrying any of their core attributes (ride, stolid timeless styling, smoothness, etc) over to their EVs so I'm not holding my breath.

 

[500AMM]

PHEVs are a part of the green politics - which is totally dictating the entire car business. The PHEVs are more like a forgiven apology for the car business to even produce and sell a fossil fuel powered car. The PHEV is just a pre-stage for their next fully EV of that particular model. Fossil fuel will be phased out much, much faster than anyone dare to think, me included. Fossil fuel powered vehicles are already by far banned in the car business and they shall be taken off the road as soon as possible at any cost. That's also one of the main reasons for all our parts going NLA. In 12-15 years are many of the young green heads demonstrating today - well positioned into the core politics in all nations, and they will use their power.

Enjoy the freedom while you can guys!
.

 

[maw1124]

Yeah, just don't race a Cyber Truck or a Plaid or a Burberry or whatever they call their latest Voltmobile.

You might lose that race but they'd much rather be driving this.

It seems in this application, the plug in battery is there for a power boost only, which doesn't scream "green" to me, despite its color. I wonder what the mileage ratings are, and of course would need to see it in action before deciding whether it's trash or not. My guess is not.

If the mileage ratings are like that of the S (see link above ... Combined/City/Highway: 23/20/29 mpg), it makes you wonder what's the point. My S55 gets over 20mph highway and it's not carrying around a battery system.

maw

 

[Draginev]

PHEVs are a part of the green politics - which is totally dictating the entire car business. The PHEVs are more like a forgiven apology for the car business to even produce and sell a fossile fuel powered car. The PHEV is just a pre-stage for their next fully EV of that particular model. Fossile fuel will be phased out much, much faster than anyone dare to think, me included. Fossile fuel powered vehicles are already by far banned in the car business and they shall be taken off the road as soon as possible at any cost. That's also one of the main reasons for all our parts going NLA. In 12-15 years are many of the young green heads demonstrating today - well positioned into the core politics in all nations, and they will use their power.

Enjoy the freedom while you can guys!
.

In theory it might but not in applications. In reality it won't work by forcing people to go EV. Even if the mandate decided to be free from CE by 2035. You can't convince 8 billions people on the planet to do so. Only Scandinavian countries with Stockholm syndrome will obey.

So this will cause a revolt and protest. The majority doesn't want to drive an EV car. Not even me. But I understand that this phase shift occur by forcing to raise the fuel prices meanwhile in Asia continent is still very cheap and will continuing to do so. Because the government can't force the people or they will be out of the throne.

The whole agenda with EV is absurd, bitter and not very realistic. We still have snow here and there is nothing wrong with the climate. So what's really the point?

 

[500AMM]

Draginev, it's interesting and I would personally agree with what you said, but the ongoing politics proves something else. It won't happen overnight but the CO2 reduction will be forced through with global politics, and the availability of fossil fuel will gradually be reduced and the price level for private consumers will be cosmic. I guess it will be a controlled production of fossil fuel for utility and service vehicles. Yes, the agenda for EV is not realistic, it is not enough raw materials on the earth to produce all those batteries and the recirculation is not solved yet. Things doesn't march in step here, we need an alternative to the EVs.

EV for me is just a test, and the fact that we needed a new car on a very short notice due to an unexpected transmission break down on our previous DD. Our Volvo XC40 Recharge is really a great car in every way, but the continuous planning for all driving and continuous need for charging is pretty stressful, so we'll see how long I hold on to it. Give me a Porsche Panamera 4S/GTS/Turbo, 2017 or newer any day!

...I know, I know..

 

[Draginev]

@500AMM C02 is not really the enemy here. It benefits life carbon cycle. Trees would love it. The more CO2 it gets, the more oxygen it produces. The beauty of the planet is that it is a self correcting system.

There is a debate whether the fossil fuel is really from dinosaurs or if it is an abiotic substances which means that the Earth generates it endlessly between the earth crusts. If we are talking about how much barrels of oil we consume today won't make any sense of how much dinosaurs were on Earth? I'm not trying to be a conspiracist here, the math here doesn't match and none of my professors can answer this either.

I have a few points that can raise some questions or make you think. This is one of them:

According to google, we globally consume 97,103,871 barrels per day of oil, now to put that in perspective, the weight of a single barrel of oil is approximately 135kg, that's over Ten million tons a day, and that trend has kept approximately the same for the past decade or so, so we can assume that an unfathomable mass of oil has been extracted from the earth since Humanity has been alive, but according to the biogenic oil theory we're told to believe that oil comes from dead &decaying plankton, algae, vegetation and dinosaurs over the past 3.7 billion years which to me doesn't really add up, how many billions of ton of life would have to die and not be reincorporated into the natural cycle, then sink and decay in order for this to occur and supply what oil we could extract, It makes more sense that hydrocarbons from the stars that ended up inside the earth and merely leaks back to the top, just like Magma

I can't know for sure but something doesn't add up mathematically. Also the majority of people doesn't understand the chemical equilibrium and its chemical process.