2011 Mercedes-benz C300 4matic Sport 1-owner Off Lease Xclean on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Smart brand might be doomed

Reports are painting a less than rosy picture of the Smart brand's future. The Daimler-owned carmaker is going fully electric in 2020, but that might not be enough to keep it alive for long. Inside sources, quoted by Automobile Magazine, are saying Renault is likely to pull out of the partnership that created the current Smart ForTwo/Renault Twingo pairing introduced in 2014. The two rear-engined cars share a platform, and when the current Twingo is done for, Renault might want to part ways. In addition, Mercedes isn't willing to prop up Smart on its own, and there is a possibility that the entire Smart brand could be shuttered by 2026. A previous joint venture was the ForFour hatch co-developed with Mitsubishi, and despite the ForFour name living on in the current generation rear-engined car, the earlier FWD hatchback has quickly been forgotten. Not long ago, Smart presented its Forease open-top concept to give customers a glimpse of what future Smart cars would look like, but at its heart the Forease was still a current Smart dressed up with concept car details. The next-generation Mercedes-Benz A-Class is to be signed off in 2021 for a 2025 introduction, and it can be underpinned by a more flexible, fully scalable platform that could also serve to support a new entry-level Mercedes-Benz vehicle that could render the separate Smart brand pointless. Then there's Geely, who now owns nearly 10 percent of Daimler, and who is partnering with Daimler to launch a new "premium" ride-hailing venture in China. As Geely develops its mobility solutions, it is likely to keep an eye on Smart: Smart cars have been car-sharing staples around the world for quite a while, from users such as Car2Go. Automobile Magazine says that if a Smart is co-developed with Geely, it might suit the Chinese market well, but a global business case might be challenging. In any case, if Smart wants to survive beyond the current Renault partnership, the new model should be agreed upon quickly, and it must be based on a platform flexible enough to support full electric drive. Reportedly, there are now ongoing feasibility studies for a fully electric Daimler "U-Class," which would include a Smart-like three or five-door hatch with two wheelbase options, a ride-sharing shuttle with autonomous capabilities, and an urban delivery panel van. But Smart must justify itself for the upcoming decades, or the future Daimler products that occupy its niche will be wearing a three-pointed star instead.

2014 Mercedes B-Class ED battery much bigger than previously stated

There was something unexpected hiding in the new configurator for the 2014 Mercedes-Benz B-Class Electric Drive: a $600 "Temporary range extender." Since we've never heard of such a thing, we had to click through for more. The official explanation runs like this: A suite of options to further increase your driving range includes added insulation of the doors and roof for to increase climate-control efficiency, along with an electrically heated windshield and a range-extending charge function. By pressing a button on the console prior to charging, the maximum charge level for battery will increased for the next charge cycle. The higher-capacity charge can provide up to 17 additional miles of range. The passive features that increase range should be standard in all models, we think. But we were more curious about the battery charge situation. How do you increase a maximum? And is it a good idea to do so? The configurator includes this disclaimer, after all: Range extender should only be used on a limited basis, and could shorten battery life if used excessively. How much is excessive? We investigate below. The B-Class ED has, according to the specs, a 28-kWh battery. First, let's understand what this "temporary range extender" is all about. The B-Class ED has, according to the specs, a 28-kWh battery. But Terry Wei, from the Mercedes-Benz USA product and technology communications department, confirmed to AutoblogGreen that the B-Class ED is actually hiding a 36-kWh battery, but the automaker is calling it a 28-kWh battery because that's how much energy capacity is used in day-to-day use. Most automakers publicly claim the actual capacity and then admit they use a percentage of it. The Chevy Volt, for example, has a 16.5-kWh battery pack, but a "full charge" only fills up around 65 percent of that. In the B-Class ED, the 28 kWh of useable energy provides an EPA-certified 87 miles of range. But, since there are eight kWh of reserve, the temporary range extender (we think of it as a software update accessed by a button) can access some of that and offer the aforementioned 17 miles. Now that we know what we're dealing with, this reminds us of an evolved version of the "remote wireless charging" feature that was touted in the Reva EV. Wei said that the reason the feature is optional is because Mercedes doesn't think most people will need it. Eighty-seven miles is plenty for your average EV driver, but when you want to have 100+ in the tank, you can.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.