← Back to context

Comment by eptcyka

14 hours ago

Not all of those inventions are bad. But not all of them are coming from a place of necessity. All of them do increase complexity. My gripe with Mercedes is not that they are constantly pushing boundaries on what can be done with more tech. My main gripe is that the EVs they are building are essentially as complex as the ICE cars and follow largely the same design principles as the ICE cars. For instance, in the EQS, instead of applying engine breaking when the driver takes their foot off the pedal, they went to great lengths to _move the break pedal_ in proportion to the amount of engine breaking that is currently being applied as per the VCUs command. And yet the door cards on the EQS are not up to the standard of an S class.

My main gripe with MB is that they have this new technology that could simplify things and let them build a better product. Instead of building around it, they shove it in to their existing designs. I was expecting an electric S class to be more akin to a Lucid Air sans the teething problems of a new company. Instead, we get weak attempts at solving non issues.

And whilst they are certainly not in the market of producing affordable vehicles, I would hope that using EV tech they could create a better version of their existing fleet. I do not think anyone buying an A class cares about the 4 popper under the hood - losing it and simplifying radically, in my mind at least, would give them more budget and leeway to create a more compelling product.

    > "instead of applying engine breaking when the driver takes their foot off the pedal, they went to great lengths to _move the break pedal_ in proportion to the amount of engine breaking that is currently being applied as per the VCUs command"

Regenerative braking slows the car more aggressively than an ICE where you take your foot of the gas, so the pedal change isn't putting on the brakes, it's communicating to a driver used to ICE that the car is slowing more than might be expected.

There may also be a sports-related reason for people who habitually left-foot brake.

  • It depends how much you draw from the motor/generator. One can modulate it as they want, whatever can't go into the battery due to chemistry or drive constraints can be disposed of as heat.

  • You clearly have never used a car like that. You develop muscle memory for where the pedal is - finding that the pedal is not where it used to be does not inspire much confidence.

    Every other manufacturer has managed to control regen breaking via throttle modulation - even ICE hybrid cars have been doing that for ages.

    • I've used left-foot-braking in my (ICE-powered) daily driver for years.

      Regenerative braking is very different to taking your foot off the accelerator in a conventional ICE car, it's much more powerful a stopping force than traditional engine-braking.

      I understand the rationale for moving the pedal to illustrate the amount of "braking" force. I'll admit I'm not exactly a typical driver though.

      3 replies →

The equilibrium of "good enough vs technological simplicity" for cars was probably reached in the 1950s. Everything after that was more or less solving "non-issues" with ever-increasing complexity ;)