2016 Mercedes-benz C-class C300 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Daimler says straight up it doesn't cheat on emissions tests

Distancing itself from VW and its diesel emissions scandal, Daimler has put out a statement saying that it has never installed devices on their vehicles that would artificially reduce emissions during a testing process. The company added that it "actively" supports European regulators' efforts to improve emissions-testing methods to better measure emissions during "real" driving conditions. BMW put out a similar statement last week, saying that its diesels are programmed to be tested properly. While Mercedes-Benz diesels were a fixture on US roads in past decades, the company's diesel sales are now concentrated overseas. "We categorically deny the accusation of manipulating emission tests regarding our vehicles," Daimler said in Friday's statement. "A defeat device, a function which illegitimately reduces emissions during testing, has never been and will never be used at Daimler." There's a reason for that sort of straightforward statement. Namely, heads continue to roll at VW after the automaker admitted it manipulated software in its diesel vehicles to pass US emissions testing. VW followed up by saying that as may as 11 million vehicles worldwide may contain that software and has set aside $7.3 billion to address the issue. VW CEO Martin Winterkorn stepped down as well. Take a look at Daimler's press release below. Daimler AG categorically denies any and all allegations of manipulation Stuttgart, Sep 25, 2015 In light of the ongoing assertions from the Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH), a non-government organisation, and the related speculation, Daimler AG once again clearly states that: We categorically deny the accusation of manipulating emission tests regarding our vehicles. A defeat device, a function which illegitimately reduces emissions during testing, has never been and will never be used at Daimler. This holds true for both diesel and petrol engines. Our engines meet and adhere to every legal requirement. In light of the written request by the DUH, which was sent to us this morning with a deadline to respond by 3:00 pm (CET), and the seven questions they posed, we can confirm that none of the allegations apply to our vehicles. The technical programming of our engines adheres to all legal requirements. We have no knowledge of measurements that indicate our vehicles did not meet legally required standards.

Merecedes-Benz EQS, Ford Mustang Mach-E GT and Subaru Forester Wilderness | Autoblog Podcast #702

In this episode of the Autoblog Podcast, Editor-in-Chief Greg Migliore is joined by Senior Editor James Riswick. They've been driving some exciting new EVs, like the Ford Mustang Mach-E GT and the Mercedes-Benz EQS. They also discuss driving the new Subaru Forester Wilderness, as well as the perfectly agreeable Toyota Camry XSE Hybrid. James compares four big-name off-roaders — the Ford Bronco, Jeep Wrangler, Toyota 4Runner and Land Rover Defender — based on their ability to accommodate a big load of luggage. Next they reach into the mailbag for comments on the Genesis GV70, as well as a Spend My Money question about replacing a wrecked Subaru Ascent with another three-row SUV. Send us your questions for the Mailbag and Spend My Money at: Podcast@Autoblog.com. Autoblog Podcast #702 Get The Podcast Apple Podcasts – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast in iTunes Spotify – Subscribe to the Autoblog Podcast on Spotify RSS – Add the Autoblog Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator MP3 – Download the MP3 directly Rundown What we're driving: 2022 Ford Mustang Mach-E GT 2022 Mercedes-Benz EQS 2022 Subaru Forester Wilderness 2022 Toyota Camry XSE Hybrid Luggage testing the off-roaders: Ford Bronco vs. Jeep Wrangler vs. Land Rover Defender vs. Toyota 4Runner  Mailbag: Thoughts on the Genesis GV70 Spend My Money: Three-row SUV to replace Subaru Ascent Feedback Email – Podcast@Autoblog.com Review the show on Apple Podcasts Autoblog is now live on your smart speakers and voice assistants with the audio Autoblog Daily Digest. Say “Hey Google, play the news from Autoblog” or "Alexa, open Autoblog" to get your favorite car website in audio form every day. A narrator will take you through the biggest stories or break down one of our comprehensive test drives. Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

Why it's difficult to accurately test the efficiency of a plug-in car

When it comes to electric vehicles and plug-ins in general, the Environmental Protection Agency-certified range is a hugely important number. While actual range anxiety is largely psychological, the magic number does provide a point of comparison of buyers considering one EV over another. The driving distance is also often touted by automakers when marketing their models. Unfortunately, as Green Car Reports finds in a recent deep dive, the way the EPA calculates the figure is a convoluted mess, and discovering the reasons why is definitely worth the read. The issue isn't about bad science but instead comes down to vague wording. The EPA's accepted range test is sourced from an evaluation called J-1634 from the Society of Automotive Engineers, and it seems to provide balanced results for vehicles that automatically reach a single state of charge when plugged in. However for models with multiple charge settings, the situation gets complicated very quickly. Of course, these modes are often created in the software, meaning that a car's certified driving distance can change with just a few taps of the keyboard without the real world results owners might experience actually changing. By showing the test's effects on the certified range for the Tesla Model S, Nissan Leaf and Mercedes-Benz B-Class Electric Drive over the last few years, Green Car Reports makes a compelling argument that it's the evaluation that needs to change. Thankfully, it appears that the solution is a very simple one. Get the details here.