2008 Mercedes Benz R350 4-matic Hi-options Panorama Roof 3rd Row Seat Like New. on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Mercedes-Benz EQC vs. Jaguar I-Pace vs. Tesla Model X: How they compare on paper

The Mercedes-Benz EQ line is officially alive and kicking, with the reveal of the EQC electric crossover. It joins a segment that, while still in its infancy, seems ready to take off. Mercedes lists as the EQC's competitors the Jaguar I-Pace, The Audi E-Tron Quattro and the BMW iX3. While we've seen all of these, at least in concept or pre-production form, only one — the Jag — has actually been launched in production form. We've seen a concept and subsequent spy shots of the iX3, and the Audi EV will get its official specs publicized later this month. One electric SUV Mercedes didn't specifically call out was the Tesla Model X. As such, we've decided to compare on paper the Mercedes-Benz EQC 400, the Jaguar I-Pace S and the Tesla Model X 75D: All three are dual-motor EVs, though the Tesla is the longest and tallest. The EQC has the most power, but it and the Model X's 4.9-second 0-60 times fall short of the I-Pace. It also has the lowest top speed and electric driving range. (Mercedes sent us an updated range figure, but it's using the generous and largely outdated NEDC cycle; we're still waiting on an EPA rating.) We'll be interested to see how much the Mercedes weighs. Mercedes hasn't divulged the price of the EQC yet, but we imagine it'll fall pretty near to the $70,000 mark. As for Audi, we'll revisit this comparison after those details are made available on September 17. If you're interested in some other EV comparisons, we have a couple others that we published to compare the I-Pace to premium Teslas, as well as against other less-expensive EVs. If you want to learn more about these EVs, and compare them with other cars, be sure to check out our Car Finder and comparison tools. Related Video: Featured Gallery Mercedes-Benz EQC 400 EV Crossover View 28 Photos Green Jaguar Mercedes-Benz Tesla Crossover SUV Electric Luxury Comparison jaguar i-pace mercedes-benz eqc

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