2012 Black Gl550! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Race recap: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix gets very wet, a little wild

More than at any other race, the Monaco Grand Prix question is: which combination of demolition derby, Safety Cars, and bad pit strategy will decide the podium? Last year Lewis Hamilton's late, confounding pit stop cost him victory. The year before, Nico Rosberg's qualifying "mistake" put him on pole and Mercedes-AMG Petronas' pit strategy sealed his win – good for Nico, bad for Hamilton and the rest of the field. In 2013 Hamilton dropped from second to fourth when he lollygagged in the pits. In all three years, Rosberg won. The new X factor for 2016: a Red Bull resurgence that helped Daniel Ricciardo clinch his first career pole. Nevertheless, bad pit strategy had its say in the results. Ricciardo built up a 13-second lead by Lap 15 in spite of heavy rains that forced the Safety Car to lead the first eight laps of the race. Ricciardo stopped on Lap 23 to switch to intermediate tires for the drying track, ceding the lead to Hamilton. Hamilton pitted from the lead on Lap 31 for softs, then Red Bull pulled Ricciardo in again on Lap 32 and made a snap decision to put him on ultra softs, but the tires weren't ready when Ricciardo reached his pit box. What should have been a three-second pit stop turned into a 13.6-second pit stop. Ricciardo left the pits as Hamilton came down the straight and the Aussie lost the lead into the first corner. Despite two attempts to pass later in the race, Hamilton finished first, the Aussie second. It's the second race in a row where pit strategy cost Ricciardo a near-certain win. Conversely, Force India nailed both tire strategy and pit timing with Sergio Perez. The Mexican started in eighth but got into third before half the race was done, passing four cars in the pits, and finished on the podium's final step. Otherwise the order barely changed from about half distance, with Ferrari driver Sebatian Vettel in fourth, followed by Fernando Alonso in the McLaren, Nico Hulkenberg in the second Force India, Rosberg in the second Mercedes, Carlos Sainz for Toro Rosso, Jenson Button in the second McLaren, and Felipe Massa taking the final point for tenth for Williams. Storms didn't only hover over the area, though – dark clouds hung around several teams and drivers. Mercedes' reliability is no longer so reliable. The Silver Arrows suffered engine issues on both cars in qualifying, and Hamilton's problem almost kept him from setting a time in Q3.

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.

Comparison test: 2019 Acura RDX vs. compact luxury SUV competitors

Truth be told, if we were to compare the all-new 2019 Acura RDX with those compact luxury crossover SUVs it would most likely be cross-shopped against, you'd be looking at a different list. Even Acura admits that Lexus and Infiniti are the most likely bogies, but with the 2019 RDX, Honda's luxury brand is attempting to attract those customers who think as much with their hearts as with their heads. And for the most part, those folks have been buying from German brands: the Audi Q5, BMW X3 and Mercedes-Benz GLC-Class. So, to show how the new RDX compares to them, Acura actually provided examples of each during the recent press drive along with a Volvo XC60. All were determined to have greater emotional appeal than the last RDX, and we would certainly agree. For, as much as the previous-generation RDX made sense on paper, it was really hard to get excited about it. And when you're paying extra for a luxury vehicle, shouldn't you get a little excited? Well, as luck would have it, Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski and I were on hand in Whistler, British Columbia, for the press launch. We didn't have an abundance of time in each RDX competitor, but in conjunction with our usual comparison chart, our impressions should provide a good first taste of how the new RDX compares. Performance and fuel economy Contributing Editor James Riswick: On paper at least, the RDX is gutsier than its comparably powered European rivals. It also weighs the same or less, which logically should mean it'll be the quickest in a straight line. During my brief drives, though, I'm not sure it really stood taller than the three Germans. It at least matches them for smoothness, which is something that can't be said about the Volvo. Fuel economy is lower than them all when you consider all but the Mercedes come standard with all-wheel drive. It's also worth noting that all the competitors are available with engine upgrades, and unless Acura's forthcoming resurrection of Type S models includes the RDX, it should stay that way. Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski: Line 'em all up in a drag race, and I have a feeling the Acura would squirt away to victory. A good bit of that, though, would be due to its 10-speed automatic transmission, which offers a huge spread of ratios and fires off extremely quick shifts. In the real world, I'd guess fuel economy will be similar across the board, so I'm willing to call that category a draw.