Mercedes concedes its cars are too heavy, focusing on weight reduction

dannyboy2 submitted on 11/06/2007 Official AutoSpies Timestamp: 8:12 PM
from: www.motorauthority.com

[43] user comments | category: Misc News

Tags: Mercedes-Benz

Mercedes-Benz

Over the years Mercedes models have been gaining so much weight engineers have been forced to increase engine output to the point where it’s eclipsing the levels of supercars just to keep up with the competition in the performance stakes. A prime example of this is the SL, a two-seater coupe-convertible that weighs more than two tons in some guises and develops up to 604hp.

Throw in a monster twin-turbo V12 engine and the car will rocket in a straight line but get to the twisty stuff and it will be left eating the dust of its lighter and better handling competition. Then there’s the increased wear and tear on the tires, suspension, brakes and transmission, plus the constant trips to the fuel station. Read Article

Comments:

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters):
[img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent004.myautospies.com/users/150/Sample-Gallery/sample1.JPG[/img]

neutral - 11/6/2007 9:13:26 PM

+3 Boost

Haha, its funny that Mercedes finally says this. As a Mercedes fan for life, I have noticed this. GM has the same issues with weight. Great car companies, great cars, but just too heavy. Especially in this day and age, fuel economy is just too important.

Look at the new Saturn Vue for example, great looking, high quality car, just too damn heavy.

reply to this comment

EnnNorak - 11/8/2007 7:56:57 AM

+1 Boost

Nothing wrong with weight -- it improves the sprung to unsprung weight ratio for a good comfy ride. If Mercedes wants to rduce body wieght then aluminum is the answer. At the same time, wheels need to lighten up with rims made of magnesium alloy.

dannyboy2 - 11/6/2007 9:27:00 PM

+1 Boost

At least Mercedes cars usually come with the latest in safety and comfort features.. the same can't be said for most other carmakers.

reply to this comment

Lexus - 11/6/2007 10:00:24 PM

+1 Boost

At least MB had the ball to admit that their car is heavy as Pig, and are willing to go on a Diet. Who next?

reply to this comment

S4cabriofoxone - 11/6/2007 10:06:52 PMView My AgentSpace

+1 Boost

The only one that I thing is REALLY too heavy is the C63 AMG--but what it looks like on paper is the farthest thing from your mind when you stomp the pedal... and even when you get into the twisties.

The rest are class-competitive.

reply to this comment

S4cabriofoxone - 11/6/2007 10:07:31 PMView My AgentSpace

+1 Boost

Now that I look at it, perhaps "class-competitive" isn't enough. Perhaps all of the cars in these classes need to lose weight--not just Mercedes.

dannyboy2 - 11/6/2007 10:37:10 PM

-1 Boost

Yeh but i doubt the C63 will handle anywhere near as well as just a 328 or a5 3.0..

Press the accelerator at a corner and the traction control will be cutting all your fun.

Threepoint1415926 - 11/6/2007 10:51:52 PM

+2 Boost

Havent read the reviews on the C63 yet, have we dannyboy? By all accounts, the C63 is a performance monster which can be driven with traction control OFF.

Monk - 11/6/2007 10:07:20 PMView My AgentSpace

-1 Boost

YES YES YES YES YES YES
I love this
more for less

reply to this comment

Threepoint1415926 - 11/6/2007 10:58:38 PM

+3 Boost

I really think a lot of modern cars need to go on a diet. Porsche's are pushing 3500 lbs, M5/S6/E63 all over 4000 lbs and the SL (a small car by its dimensions) is nearly the same. I said in an earlier post that Jaguar is to be commended for their weight savings techniques in the XJR.

At least Mercedes has admitted their problem and should be on a track to fixing it. Please Dr. Z, make it so!!!

reply to this comment

Heyhuub - 11/7/2007 4:12:19 AM

+2 Boost

Audi also should apply it to more cars then just the TT R8 and A8. The A8 for example is still slightly lighter then it's compettetive S-class and 7 series rival dispite it's AWD system.

Threepoint1415926 - 11/7/2007 3:01:49 PM

+2 Boost

Audi's A8L **unladen** weight is 4409 lbs
Mercedes S559 **curb** weight is 4465 lbs

No sense in comparing the standard A8 since it's competition to the S550 short wheel base. Also remember, curb weight includes coolant, motor oil, washer fluid, full tank of gas and battery while unladen does not.

Though if I remember correctly, Audi did aluminum extensively in the A8 like Jag did but you're right, they still have that heavy power train to deal with.

I spose it should also be noted that the:

W220 S500 was 4133lbs
W140 S500 was 4830 lbs
W126 500SEL was 3649 lbs

So not necessarily has the weight of their cars only been going up. But, there was nothing wrong with the W126 and considering a 997T weighs now what a huge sedan did 20 years ago is something to be embarrassed about.

S4cabriofoxone - 11/7/2007 10:43:11 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

Threepoint, for a truly valid comparison, use the A8L vs. S550 4Matic:

A8L 4.2 4,409lbs

S550 4Matic 4,630lbs

221lbs is not an insignificant difference. The aluminum definitely helps. However, I agree that the XJ is commendably light.

Threepoint1415926 - 11/8/2007 12:31:45 AM

+1 Boost

But, we're still using unladen weight for the A8L... Do you happen to know what the curb weight is?

huu76 - 11/7/2007 12:27:14 AM

-1 Boost

midengine,
What do your 3 articles have to do with weight and performance? The Acura MDX handles great (best) too according to the latest C/D SUV comparison.

AMG is going to have to learn to refine engines rather than continualling enlarging them.
The C230 Kompressor sedan had a good small engine with a broad torque band.

The next gen batteries will knock off 50% of the battery weight case of the LS600hL which is too porky. They'll really beat the Germans considering it already outclasses and outruns all but the V12-turbo S.

reply to this comment

Threepoint1415926 - 11/7/2007 12:56:52 AM

+1 Boost

I dont know where you're getting the "it already outclasses and outruns" part. I'm looking at the Dec 07 MT in front of me, noticing the LS600hL in last place. Editors commented "Charging hard up the hill depleted the battery quickly (actually, pressing the gas pedal on any type of road kills the battery quickly), and horsing the CVT through its eight virtual gear ratios with liberal doses of carpet-crushing throttle provoked an unseemly 'hybrid system overheat' warning... after this session, all editors were ready to red-pencil the 600 badge down to a 500"

0-60 was tested 5.6, same as the S550 and slower than the Jag and Maserati. 1/4 was 14.1, following the same trend.

S4cabriofoxone - 11/7/2007 11:15:38 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

"They'll really beat the Germans considering it already outclasses and outruns all but the V12-turbo S."

Wrong. The A8L W12 is a full second quicker than the LS600hL, and the 760Li is at least half a second quicker. Please, don't try to justify the LS600hL, because that's impossible.

S4cabriofoxone - 11/7/2007 11:16:17 PMView My AgentSpace

+2 Boost

And what do you mean by "outclasses?"

All three Germans are (significantly) more expensive... for good reason. They offer so many things that the LS doesn't.

Yonder7 - 11/7/2007 9:10:20 AM

0 Boost

Weight reduction is not attainable without rising prices. As an example, M3 have several Carbon fiber parts but still a lot heavier than the previous model. Beside that all new gagets add more weight and most of MB already have all options available. See the all AMG already comes with fog lights but none of the actual M series is equiped with those, to losse weight? or to offer a better price?. I don't care, I prefer the C63 with its gadgets and all that weight because at the end in the numbers the gain of the M3 is just an small margin that it is almost insignificant and we need to see the instrumented test and you will understand.

reply to this comment

Threepoint1415926 - 11/7/2007 3:07:56 PM

+3 Boost

How about the example of the Jag XJ series? Same great price, new stellar weight loss. It manages to be some 400 or 500 lbs less than its rivals using such common materials as high strength steel and aluminum. There is just no need for trunks, hoods, roofs and door panels to be steel, they're not structural. Sure, per pound aluminum is about 4 times more expensive but it's also 1/4 the weight.

Yenzenho - 11/7/2007 9:19:48 AM

-1 Boost

Large load is MB biggest disgrace. Load in Toyota is minor with hybrid economy to match. Toyota growth is larger then Audi,MB and Lexus is Toyotas #1 growth. Technology of IS350 has large power over c class MB. Lexus is always the car for men and its future to come remaining #1 in world.

reply to this comment

Bill - 11/7/2007 4:44:45 PM

+1 Boost

What is Mr. Yenzenho trying to say? Can someone translate gibberish for me please? Thanks.

SixxFive - 11/7/2007 11:36:06 AM

+2 Boost

It's a double edged sword for engineers. Each maker wants to highlight the safety of their vehicle line or particular model and consumers expect to emerge from their vehicles without a scratch after a major collision....and on and on. This in relation to weight and fuel economy expectations.

reply to this comment

LexusGS - 11/7/2007 12:36:56 PM

0 Boost

As long as the Mercedes do not make their cars too cheap and light and still keep the heavy German feel to their cars I am fine with that. Their engines are still sufficient enough to accelerate regardless of the weight, but alas poor fuel consumption result. I prefer the heavy feeling of the Mercedes though.

reply to this comment

Threepoint1415926 - 11/7/2007 3:16:20 PM

+1 Boost

You mean like the heavy, crazy indestructible feel of past glory cars like the W126 560SEL? A car which weighed in at 3649lbs?

Jag_xfr - 11/7/2007 1:27:22 PM

+1 Boost

Old news, I've always known mercs were too heavy and over priced aswell!!!

reply to this comment

Yonder7 - 11/7/2007 3:10:39 PM

-1 Boost

Over priced just because Jags are not up to the challenge? Please, Eat this: Mercedes is the yardstick against the best are compared, And yes they are heavy, could be becasue they are not using so many plastic as the otherones?. Mercedes will improve but that means high tech materials and of course higher price, if not, tell me why the M3 is more expensive than the C63? Carbon fiber is not cheap and still heavier than the previous one. Do you know that BMW coupe have a marignal rank in side crash? well that because light cars most of the times have a weak scructures and less inertia to counterbalance the crash force. So I hope MB do not get too light because they will losse ground in security. Finally if you are worry about millage, Mercedes is an expensive car, do not consider it and buy a Toyota= less weight better economy, and remember: With the time even the Toyotas will be heavier , if not compare the LS460 with 760IL or even S65, you will have bitter surprise.

reply to this comment

Jag_xfr - 11/9/2007 1:46:59 PM

+1 Boost

One word - Alumminium!!! I rest my case.

Bill - 11/7/2007 4:43:16 PM

0 Boost

Whoever wrote this article seems to have "inside knowledge" of what's going on inside Mercedes. I mean how the hell can this guy claim that Mercedes has increased the power output of its simply due to weight gains? Bull. I got the impression that he thought the SL65 AMG with its 604-hp engine exists simply because it's overweight. Yeah, sure. Sarcasm intended...

Weight and power increases are a natural consequence due to the progression of technology, especially in automobiles. As far as I know, Mercedes already builds their cars with weight-saving materials where it counts, as in plastic trunk lids, lighter engine components etc. The cars are heavy I assume due to certain luxury and safety features.

Aren't Lexus cars also quite overweight?

reply to this comment

S4cabriofoxone - 11/7/2007 11:19:42 PMView My AgentSpace

+1 Boost

"I got the impression that he thought the SL65 AMG with its 604-hp engine exists simply because it's overweight. Yeah, sure. Sarcasm intended..."

LOL, that struck me, too. It's a strange opinion, to say the least.

rybo - 11/7/2007 11:35:53 PM

+1 Boost

I originally thought that too but i think the overall goal is acceleration times, not outright power. Why would mercedes want to build a car with so much power only for it to be outrun by a lighter and less powerful rival.

I know the engine in the SL65 had to have its torque electronically limited to 1,000Nm becuase it was causing too much stress on the drivetrain..

How could this be a situation Mercedes actually wants, unless it was to move the heavy SL65 with decent pace?

Yonder7 - 11/8/2007 8:22:14 AM

+1 Boost

rybo: read Bill and S4cabriofoxone. Both are right. Also More gadgets=more weight. And any mercedes AMG is capable of speeds in excess of 200mph, what kind of structure needs a car like that?, and strong one. And yes all lexus are overweight. Do you remember the Old P80 Shootingstar=$124.000.00 in 1950, now F-22 Raptor=$200.000.000.00 and of course raptor is a lot heavier and faster and have a lot of new features, I'm sure overweight but everyone wish one, That's final.

reply to this comment

SevorbeupstryIsBack - 11/9/2007 5:40:38 AM

+1 Boost

Weight is always bad, no matter how you put it.

reply to this comment

amazinBimmer - 11/9/2007 11:53:46 AM

+1 Boost

audi is heavier in most cases than the Benz and probably needs ot go ona major diet BADLY. they should switch to a rwd chassis and maybe they can compete

reply to this comment

gsh23 - 11/9/2007 3:16:46 PM

+1 Boost

lightweight luxury is an oxymoron.

reply to this comment

Porschinator - 11/9/2007 8:54:21 PM

+1 Boost

FINALLY!!! AUDI could be in the weight reduction meeting as well. Unfortunately lighter = lighter materials = more $$$. If MB can reduce the weight of their vehicles by an average of 200lbs with no cost hike then awesome job!

reply to this comment

To post a comment for this story, you must first Login.

If you do not have an account, you will need to Register (It's Free!).