1985 Mercedes Benz 380sl In Mint Condition In And Out, Two Tops Only 81k on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Mercedes may end Tesla supply agreement for B-Class Electric Drive

The Mercedes-Benz B Class Electric Drive has only been rolling off the production line for 17 months, each one equipped with a battery pack and drivetrain from Tesla Motors, but already there is talk of big upcoming changes. According to a report from the German publication Auto Motor und Sport, the next-generation version of this model will see an end to the Tesla-supplied tech and a hugely improved range. Currently, the electric sedan gets an EPA-rated 87 miles of range, using 28 kWhs of its 36-kWh battery, though its now-standard "Range Plus" package takes advantage of more of the pack, stretching that driving to 100 miles or so. It may take a year or several – the model just had a refresh – but expect those distance digits to double. The rumored range is said to be 500 km (310.7 miles), but since that would likely be calculated using the European drive cycle, expect something significantly lower stateside; say 220-ish official miles. This would be in keeping with expectations from a number of battery-powered competitors in the 2017-2018 time frame. It is unknown if this supposed next-gen B Class Electric Drive is in any way related to the rumored "Ecoluxe" program. The Tesla/Daimler relationship stretches back to 2009, when the Stuttgart-based outfit made a significant investment in the California automaker, quite possibly saving it from extinction in the process. We have reached out Mercedes-Benz about this report, but as of this writing, have not had a reply. We will update this post when we hear back. Related Video: Featured Gallery 2015 Mercedes-Benz B-Class Electric Drive: Paris 2014 View 13 Photos Green Rumormill Mercedes-Benz Tesla Electric Sedan electric drive electric drivetrain

Trump calls Germans 'very bad,' vows to stop their car sales in US

TAORMINA, Italy -Talks between President Trump and other leaders of the world's rich nations at the G7 summit on Friday were expected to be "robust" and "challenging" after he had lambasted NATO allies and condemned Germans as "very bad" for their trade policies. Trump's confrontational remarks in Brussels, on the eve of the two-day summit in the Mediterranean resort town of Taormina, cast a pall over a meeting at which America's partners had hoped to coax him into softening his stances on trade and climate change. According to German media reports, Trump condemned Germany as "very bad" for its trade policies in a meeting with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, signaling he might take steps to limit sales of German cars in the United States. "The Germans are bad, very bad," he reportedly told Juncker. "Look at the millions of cars that they're selling in the USA. Horrible. We're gonna stop that." White House economic adviser Gary Cohn on Friday confirmed the reports. "He said they're very bad on trade, but he doesn't have a problem with Germany." Cohn said Trump had pointed out during the meeting that his father had German roots in order to underscore the message that he had nothing against the German people. Trump's spokesman Sean Spicer said Trump had "tremendous respect" for Germany and had only complained about unfair trade practices in the meeting. Juncker called the reports in Spiegel Online and Sueddeutsche Zeitung exaggerated. The reports translated "bad" with the German word "boese," which can also mean "evil," leading to confusion when English-language media translated the German reports back into English. "The record has to be set straight," Juncker said, noting that the translation issue had exaggerated the seriousness of what Trump had said. "It's not true that the president took an aggressive approach when it came to the German trade surplus." "He said, like others have, that (the United States) has a problem with the German surplus. So he was not aggressive at all," Juncker added. In January, Trump threatened to slap a 35 percent tax on German auto imports. "If you want to build cars in the world, then I wish you all the best. You can build cars for the United States, but for every car that comes to the USA, you will pay 35 percent tax," he said. "I would tell BMW that if you are building a factory in Mexico and plan to sell cars to the USA, without a 35 percent tax, then you can forget that." Last year, the U.S.

McLaren, Red Bull and Ferrari call for unfreezing F1 engines

Formula One is a hugely expensive sport. Not only do you have enormous salaries and logistical expenses, as you would in any other sport, but each team also spends huge sums developing their own chassis from the ground up – and so too do the participating automakers in developing the engines. One of the ways the series organizers mitigate those costs is by freezing development. So once the new crop of V6 turbo hybrid powertrains were developed, that was it. But now three of the of the sport's leading teams are calling on the FIA to unfreeze engine development. Their reason? Unfair advantage. There's little question that Mercedes did the best job of developing its "power unit" to meet the new regulations that took effect at the beginning of this past season. That's how the Mercedes team won all but three of the grands prix this season and finished with at least one car on the podium at every single race. It's also a big part of how the teams that bought their engines from Mercedes this season managed to consistently outperform the other non-works-supported teams. That clear advantage is why Red Bull, Ferrari and now McLaren are calling for engine development to be unfrozen. Their argument is that, under the current locked-down status quo, their engine suppliers (Renault, Ferrari and Honda, respectively) cannot possibly catch up. So unless the FIA and Formula One Management want the next few seasons to be the kind of absolute blow-outs that this past season was, these leading teams argue, the powers that be are going to have to make some changes. For its part, Mercedes naturally counters that unfreezing engine development would send costs spiraling out of control. But then of course it stands to lose the most by re-opening engine development. If those three teams, however, closely intertwined as they are with the three other engine suppliers participating in next year's championship, manage to solicit enough support from the other customer teams and bring the matter to a vote, Mercedes may very well find itself out-numbered. News Source: ESPNImage Credit: Patrick Baz/AFP/Getty Motorsports Ferrari McLaren Mercedes-Benz F1 engine