Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Transportation

Mercedes-AMG to Drop Four-Cylinder for Inline-Sixes and V-8s (caranddriver.com) 73

Posted by EditorDavid from the car-talk dept.
"Mercedes-AMG is transitioning away from the four-cylinder plug-in hybrid powertrain," reports Car and Driver, "and back towards the inline-six and V-8 powertrains more traditionally associated with the brand." That isn't to say that AMG had a change of heart concerning the merits of the four-cylinder powertrain, but rather that the automaker is responding to customer criticisms. "Technically, the four-cylinder is one of the most advanced drivetrains available in a production car. It's also right up there on performance. But despite this, it failed to resonate with our traditional customers. We've recognized that," a source at Mercedes told Autocar...

Car and Driver also spoke with AMG chief Michael Schiebe at the reveal of the AMG GT XX electric concept car... Although the four-cylinder may be on its way out, Schiebe did say AMG remains committed to plug-in hybrids. "There are a lot of advantages of combining electric motors with combustion engines," Schiebe said. "We want to offer different kinds of drivetrain opportunities on the combustion side to our customers, so they can choose for whatever purpose they want to use the car."

Much of the criticism of the C63 and GLC63's powertrain was focused on the lackluster sound when compared with the symphony of a V-8. The M139 drew our ire for sounding "reedy" and "buzzy" in our test of the current C63. The C63's hybrid system also brings the car's curb weight up to nearly 5000 pounds, meaning it didn't provide a meaningful performance boost over its V-8 predecessor despite offering significantly more horsepower....

AMG wouldn't confirm exactly when the four-cylinder will be phased out, telling Autocar that it will remain in production for the time being before "eventually" being replaced.
Thanks to long-time Slashdot reader sinij for sharing the news.

Mercedes-AMG to Drop Four-Cylinder for Inline-Sixes and V-8s More | Reply

Mercedes-AMG to Drop Four-Cylinder for Inline-Sixes and V-8s

Comments Filter:

  • it failed to resonate with our traditional customers

    The only thing that resonates is the empty brains of vroom-vroom lovers.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      If you're getting an AMG you're not looking for some eco 4-banger. That's just how that is.

      • The Chinese are betting on a market for high end EREV sedans with some eco banger to charge the large battery when needed. I think they will be right and Mercedes drawing the wrong conclusion from their hybrid failure is going to cost them double.

        • The Chinese are betting on a market for high end EREV sedans with some eco banger to charge the large battery when needed. I think they will be right and Mercedes drawing the wrong conclusion from their hybrid failure is going to cost them double.

          I'd expect that what variation on the PHEV theme people prefer depends a lot on climate, and certainly driving habits.

          I live in the Midwest USA where we see snowfall in the winter. A quick look at the climate in China on Wikipedia tells me China doesn't get a lot of snow, at least not where most of the people live. Cold weather will mean a large draw a lot of power for cabin heating, and for an internal combustion engine there will be an abundance of waste heat for cabin heating. Then is the extra load o

          • Cabin heating takes only a couple HP. It eats into EV range because it's continuous, but it makes pretty much no difference on the ability of the ICE in an EREV to keep up.

            The average power consumption during towing is exactly what the EREV ice will be dimensioned for in the US. Again, some cabin heating matters nothing at that point.

      • It's a thing here in California to buy bigger name European cars, leave it parked in a dark alley overnight, and the next day drive it off with no muffler so that you can be extra loud and obnoxious. BMW, Mercedes, you name it. And then after that, be an even more obnoxious asshole by driving even more aggressive than a typical Angelino and cutting everybody off.

      • If you're getting an AMG you're not looking for some eco 4-banger. That's just how that is.

        Sounds about right.

        The market here consists, apparently, of people seeking a PHEV that gives them the cost savings and convenience of all electric commute during the workweek but then the "vroom vroom" feeling of a V-8 on the weekend. If people wanted a 4-banger under the hood then there's plenty of other options for that.

        Others might call them empty headed for that but that's want people want and if AMG wants their money then that is what they will provide.

    • Re:Resonate with customers (Score:4, Interesting)

      by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Saturday June 28, 2025 @10:47AM (#65482220)

      The AMG badge typically meant you either had a tuned V8 or even V12. And it wasn't for drag racing or making noise. It meant you wanted to cruise comfortably at 155+ on the autobahn. They had a nice respectable sound. The badge started to get watered down with AMG packages only having some fancy wheels. It's still amusing to me how many Cannonball run times were set with German sedans.

      • C-63 (Score:2)

        by 0xG ( 712423 )

        I think that the C63 AMG which is now a hybrid 4-banger has sold very very poorly.

      • The AMG badge typically meant you either had a tuned V8 or even V12. And it wasn't for drag racing or making noise. It meant you wanted to cruise comfortably at 155+ on the autobahn.

        They days you can do that with a not particularly advanced six, or a high end four. Modern four cylinder engines make over 400HP with turbocharging, and an engine with 300HP is more than enough to do speeds like that. The idea that you need a V8 or V12 to cruise at 155 is nonsense. (The four would be loud, but a good straight six would be fine, and since hoods are getting longer again there's room.)

        • The AMG badge typically meant you either had a tuned V8 or even V12. And it wasn't for drag racing or making noise. It meant you wanted to cruise comfortably at 155+ on the autobahn.

          They days you can do that with a not particularly advanced six, or a high end four. Modern four cylinder engines make over 400HP with turbocharging, and an engine with 300HP is more than enough to do speeds like that. The idea that you need a V8 or V12 to cruise at 155 is nonsense. (The four would be loud, but a good straight six would be fine, and since hoods are getting longer again there's room.)

          I presume we're talking mph and not kph. My V-6 matched to an 8-speed sounds overly loud at the legal limit of 80mph. I can't imagine listening to that thing at 155mph for any length of time... at least not in any "comfortably cruising" sense.

          • A couple more cylinders aren't going to move the needle on that. The remedy would be something else, like tuning differently, or adding features to the intake or exhaust to kill sound. Your V6 is also a lot louder than an L6 potentially can be.

      • It meant you wanted to cruise comfortably at 155+ on the autobahn.

        Just so I'm clear, that is 155 kph, not 155 mph. 150 miles per hour is NASCAR racing speeds.

        On the open interstate out in the western parts of the USA I've cruised at about 90 mph before, which is about 145 kph. That was stupid of me and not something I'd recommend but it's something that I clearly survived and was comfortable doing in what I recall was a Buick with a 3.1L V6. The people I had to switch off with for shared driving duties kept to about 85 mph, still crazy fast and not recommended but we s

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Ost99 ( 101831 )

          155 mph / 250 kph is not at all uncommon on the autobahn.

          • It absolutely is, only a few of the finest cars can comfortably do that speed in any functional way (even Mercedes speed limit the E63 to this speed normally despite the 600horsepower engine capable of much more) to say nothing of the traffic making that speed actually dangerous enough to cause people to take caution and drive slightly slower. If you're doing 130mph on the autobahn you'll find you will quite rarely get overtaken and you'll definitely be in the top 1% of speeds of road users outside peak hou

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by drnb ( 2434720 )

      The only thing that resonates is the empty brains of vroom-vroom lovers.

      And those who had to drive up a hill. Or merge onto a highway safely. Who think that a lawn mower engine with turbo is not a good fit for an auto. :-)

      • The 1960s are calling you, those problems were mostly gone by the late 70s for every car made. I say mostly because cheap economy cars are still a necessity as our society is getting even more imbalanced financially.

        For most people driving a car is a necessary hassle, please don't drive your overpowered overpriced car like a race car on public roads. Merging is only an issue if you don't know how to drive and share the road. Of course the drivers we often merge with don't know how to drive and share the

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by drnb ( 2434720 )

          The 1960s are calling you, those problems were mostly gone by the late 70s for every car made.,

          No, those problems with reintroduced with 4cyl engines far smaller than their 70s counterparts, trying to make up the difference with turbo. Similar with hybrids. If the batteries are too low to contribute to power and the engine charging them, they start sucking too.

          I say mostly because cheap economy cars are still a necessity as our society is getting even more imbalanced financially.

          If you want to argue for the necessity of the tradeoff, fine. But argue that performance has not take a hit, sorry.

          Merging is only an issue if you don't know how to drive and share the road.

          Nope. Merging is safer if you have excess power to give yourself options. A lack of power limits those options and may force you

      • And those who had to drive up a hill. Or merge onto a highway safely.

        What a load of bunk.

        The 0-60 time of my base-model mid-sized family sedan with a naturally aspirated 4-banger beats the 350 cubic inch 4bbl equipped muscle car that I had 45 years ago. It has no problem merging onto highways.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by drnb ( 2434720 )

          The 0-60 time of my base-model mid-sized family sedan with a naturally aspirated 4-banger ...

          And is it the 2.0L'ish size I am referring to? A 4cyl can be OK, even in the 80s, depending on climate. But they are starting to get ridiculous in some models nowadays. Hybrids having some problems too when the battery are too low to supply power and are charging.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by drnb ( 2434720 )

          ... beats the 350 cubic inch 4bbl equipped muscle car that I had 45 years ago.

          1980s V8s were a unique mess. Compromised to hell to meet emissions and mileage standards. Late 1990s and 2000s V8s, that's when they got good again.

          • This was a pre-emissions model (the car wasn't new when I got it). The only pollution control I remember it having was a PCV valve. After adjusting net vs gross HP, the 5.7L engine was rated for similar power as my current (non turbo) 2.5L. It also probably burned through 2.5X the fuel, and produced orders of magnitude more smog.

            The new car is probably heavier, but I assume that a wider power band and more efficient transmission give my current car the overall edge in performance specs. The old car probably

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by drnb ( 2434720 )
              Personally, I found that a slightly heavier US car with a circa 2000 5.7L felt nearly identical to a slightly lighter 2004 import with a 3.0L. Both 6 speed manual. Neither with turbo. A 2025 model with 2,0L turbo didn't feel right on a test drive.
      • My driveway is bloody steep actually!

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by drnb ( 2434720 )

          My driveway is bloody steep actually!

          Coming back from the grocery store, we have a 300 yard 30 percent grade on the road home. When it snowed we took a longer less severe way home.

    • More people need to spend more time trying to enjoy their own lives rather than obsessing over what other people are doing.
    • And what you don't understand is that vroom-vroom lovers are AMG's main clientelle, and accountants and actuaries don't care how many of them have "empty" or "full" brains.
    • You got modded troll, but you are absolutely right. This sentence from the summary makes it clear that people cared about the sound:

      Much of the criticism of the C63 and GLC63's powertrain was focused on the lackluster sound when compared with the symphony of a V-8.

      Of course, that's assuming that the summary is correct.

  • Please dear lord, let the trend to replace decent inline 6 cylinder engines with 4 cylinder lawn mower engines with turbo bolted on, be reversed.

    • I owned a Volvo with their inline 6 engine and it was great. Ran smooth and the seats were super comfortable. Unfortunately the rest of the car was garbage with numerous leaking fluids, electrical problems, and rotted rubber hoses in the emissions control systems. Also had an old Jaguar with the famous 4.2L and it was equally nice to drive.

      My daily driver now is an Alfa Romeo and they managed to squeeze 280hp from a 4 cylinder engine. It’s fast enough to be fun but it’s certainly not smooth unde

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by drnb ( 2434720 )
        I have an old BMW inline 6, no turbo, that gets 21 city and 33 highway. It's rated for 24 highway but I suspect the German designed engine is not optimized for 55 mph and performs better at 65-70 mph. :-)

        • I have an old BMW inline 6, no turbo

          I have a new BMW inline 6. 3.0 liter, alloy block and heads, forged crank, closed deck twin cam, 24 valve, twin scroll turbocharged, liquid to air intercooled, direct injected, variable valve timing and lift. Growing up with carbureted American V-8s I could only dream of such technology as a kid. EVs simply hold no such fascination, the lack of complexity that makes electric motors simple and reliable also makes them boring.

  • Was looking into a hybrid toyota suv a while back.

    Gas engine was standard 6 cyl 270 hp.

    Hybrid was a 4 cyl 180 hp plus 60 hp motor.

    Not much of a difference in peak power but quite a bit of difference once the battery runs out and some of that 180 from the gas engine needs to be bled off to charge it up.

    Not an issue with city driving but not that great with overtaking on a slight uphill grade at highway speeds.

    Remember test driving a 4 cyl gas toyota suv with the wife a few years back. Tried it on one of thes

    • Toyota 6s had sludge issues.

    • That's actually very interesting, since people keep insisting hybrids have no drawbacks. If they can't go up a hill then they are going to take a dangerously long time to accelerate to passing speed on a single lane highway.

      • If the gas engine is sized right the ecvt is theoretically superior. If the ecvt and battery are an excuse to cheap out on the engine then they're only good for city driving and highways on flat terrain.

        Kinda like "fix it in software" only makes up for hardware deficiencies 9 times out of 10, and if your use case is that last 10% you're SOL because some beancounter insisted that the arithmetic is representative of all reality, not just some of it.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by rta ( 559125 )

        ..., since people keep insisting hybrids have no drawbacks. If they can't go up a hill then they are going to take a dangerously long time to accelerate to passing speed on a single lane highway.

        hybrids are fine for that, especially the passing which is https://youtube.com/watch?v=vR...
        these dudes do a 100mile loop on some highways around Denver towing 4000lbs a Ford Maverick Hybrid. the ice on that setup maxes out at a whoping 168HP (at sea level so prob less up there). my point isn't that it's a great towing rig, but get rid of the trailer and do you really need more in a general use car?

        also note that the parent was talking (I think) about just the normal Toyota 4cyl SUV being gutless, whic

        • Not much of a difference in peak power but quite a bit of difference once the battery runs out and some of that 180 from the gas engine needs to be bled off to charge it up. Not an issue with city driving but not that great with overtaking on a slight uphill grade at highway speeds.

          He is talking about a hybrid.

    • How would it handle something like going up the grapevine? Been awhile, but I think a 4 or 5 thousand foot ascent in one gradual shot. Would it run out of battery in a case like that?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nester ( 14407 )

      Yes, the integral of HP curve matters. So does gearing. And a higher redline allows for holding a lower gear (higher ratio) longer, which has more mechanical advantage (more acceleration from the same power). Vehicle weights are out of control.

      0-60mph time takes all that into account, but they're a bit game-able (manual ratios are setup to minimize the # of shifts, because they really hurt 0-60 times).

      • manual ratios are setup to minimize the # of shifts, because they really hurt 0-60 times

        Is that a problem, though?

    • Conclusion: whatever you can get out of a 4 cylinder is only sufficient for a small sedan, even if it's a hybrid.

      Dumb conclusion based on a weird sample size where you only chose cars with low hp. Modern 4 cyl engines can have more than 300 hp, and they don't struggle up hills.

  • 4 v 6 v 8 (Score:4, Insightful)

    by TheMiddleRoad ( 1153113 ) on Saturday June 28, 2025 @11:48AM (#65482300)

    4 is efficient. 6 is smooth. 8 is loud. All can make lots of power with turbos and more with hybrids.

    And they all suck compared to evs.

    • Name 1 EV that has 600 miles of range refilled in 3 minutes like my hybrid.

      • Oh I didn't realise your idea of driving was competitive petrol filling. Seems like a strange hobby.

    • 4 is efficient. 6 is smooth. 8 is loud. All can make lots of power with turbos and more with hybrids.

      And they all suck compared to evs.

      My other car has 8 cylinders and is quieter... much quieter... than my 6. Both were tuned for comfort. Oh, and both are quieter than those silly alien spaceship sounding EVs. Explain that?

      • The V8 in the Lexis from the LS400 I was in decades ago was so quiet, you could not be sure it was running. Probably still true. 8's can be extraordinarily quiet/smooth.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by nester ( 14407 )

      EVs are way too heavy, take way too long to recharge, and have much less range. The road trip I took into last year would not have been possible in an EV. They're good for some uses tho, like city commuting.

  • So no need to use a crank handle to start? (Score:3)

    by ukoda ( 537183 ) on Saturday June 28, 2025 @04:22PM (#65482872) Homepage

    There are a lot of advantages of combining electric motors with combustion engines

    The biggest advantage is getting rid of the crank handle to start the engine, those things were a pain to use. For hard core EV haters they should probably start offering crank handle starters again so they can have a traditional pure driving experience.

    • For hard core EV haters they should probably start offering crank handle starters again so they can have a traditional pure driving experience.

      For hard core ICE haters they should start offering EV's have to be charged by manually cranking a generator. That way they can get the true off grid no fossil fuel experience.

    • Re:So no need to use a crank handle to start? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by MacMann ( 7518492 ) on Saturday June 28, 2025 @06:50PM (#65483108)

      The biggest advantage is getting rid of the crank handle to start the engine, those things were a pain to use. For hard core EV haters they should probably start offering crank handle starters again so they can have a traditional pure driving experience.

      You do realize that there's more than just hand cranks to start an engine without electricity, right?

      I've seen old tractors started with a Coffman engine starter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      Those that have seen The Flight of the Phoenix have seen a Coffman starter. There was apparently a remake of the original movie that also featured a Coffman starter as it was an important part of the plot. A Coffman starter consumes a starter cartridge with each start so perhaps not exactly practical for anything but their past use on aircraft, tractors, and armored vehicles.

      Then there's air powered starters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      An air starter seems practical enough. They will run on about 90 psi compressed air or steam. Large diesel trucks will routinely have air brakes that operate off 90 psi compressed air so it would be trivial to leave an air tank pressurized for the next start. There may be a need for a backup in case of a slow leak or other issue. A trivial solution would be keeping a high pressure tank of N2 for starting, regulated down to the proper pressure of course. Maybe have a boiler for producing steam to feed the starter. There's the possibility of some kind of "jump start" attachment to connect another vehicle or portable compressor to pressurize the tank.

      I remember seeing tractors that had a small engine to start the main engine. The reasoning is that a person can easily pull start or crank start a small engine but not a big one. So there would be something like a lawnmower engine on the tractor that would be pull started, and then once up to speed engaged to start the big engine. I didn't find a reference to share with a quick search so if anyone has doubts on this then maybe someone can help me out with a link.

      I realize that the comment I'm replying to is a load of bullshit but I thought I'd use it as an opportunity to show that previous generations weren't all relying on crank starters before electric start. The electric car and gasoline car were first mass produced at about the same time so it's not like there's a deep hate of electric vehicles going back generations. The gasoline car won the market over once the electric start made the gasoline engine only trivially more complicated to get moving.

      If this hatred of electricity runs deep enough then we can discuss headlamps that burned gasoline as well as other means to provide much the same form and function of the hybrid electric vehicles we enjoy today.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ukoda ( 537183 )
        Yes, I did my fair share of bump/crash starting back in the day. The car we cranked by hand was a 1948 Lancaster, which did actually have an electric start but it often didn't work.

        My post was more of a subtle dig at the EV haters who actually have a scaled down version of a full BEV system, just to start their ICE.
      • Pony motor start was used on Caterpillar D7, D8, D9 bulldozers. A couple of childhood homes were at the edges of new developments with clearing and grading still in progress. We used to crawl around on the dozers after the crews went home, and some of the kids talked to the operators and learned about the machinery. You want steampunk lighting: try acetylene (calcium carbide).

        • Now that I know they were called a pony motor I could find more about them on the web. They were apparently fairly common up to 1960, and likely still in regular use for decades after since big construction equipment and agricultural tractors have long lives. Conversions to electric start were apparently common once electric start was the norm.

          I recall that pony motors were very basic. No throttle, no real cooling system, very simple lubrication, no muffler, maybe no air filter. None of this was require

Slashdot Top Deals

PL/I -- "the fatal disease" -- belongs more to the problem set than to the solution set. -- Edsger W. Dijkstra, SIGPLAN Notices, Volume 17, Number 5

Close