Daimler ending all ICE development

Daimler ending all ICE development

After reigning in the auto industry as the powertrain of choice for a century, the internal combustion engine is finally dying.

Now even Daimler says that it is stopping development of new internal combustion engines to focus on electric cars.

82bert | 19/09/2019

Good stuff. The future, at times, looks bright. | 19/09/2019

Perhaps Daimler is smarter than we've given them credit for. Good move.

derotam | 19/09/2019

@82bert, yes that mushroom shaped cloud will start out very bright!

jimglas | 19/09/2019

the mission will be acheived

spuzzz123 | 19/09/2019

Wow. All in on ev? I hope this isn’t lip service.

82bert | 19/09/2019

@derotam. Haha. Speaking my cynical language.

Passion2Fly | 19/09/2019

Elon Musk, the MAN who changed the world, literally.

SamO | 19/09/2019

Tesla makes the best selling car by $ worldwide.

(Drops mic)

gballant4570 | 19/09/2019

Daimler has a lot of ground to make up. I hope they put on a credible and successful effort. Most legacy companies will fail at this transition.

casun | 19/09/2019

leave it to fishev to stink up an otherwise good thread.

NKYTA | 19/09/2019

This is potentially really awesome news. Cautiously optimistic and will watch for some changes,

vmulla | 19/09/2019

It's a necessary transition for so many manufacturers - they'll move at a pace that suits them, unfortunately.

EV enthusiasts can do their part by converting ICE customers to EVs.

Passion2Fly | 19/09/2019

Elon Musk showed the world the electrical cars are actually better and more appealing than ICE. He showed the world that not only performance but also range and charging networks can be as good if not better than ICE...
No other EV manufacturer was able to make EV cars more attractive than ICE cars.

Nothing to do with EU politicians and China expect for the fact that EU and China want a piece of this emerging market...

SamO | 19/09/2019

Model S best selling luxury car in the US because Of China?

Lol. Sound theory. Right up there with the global warming “conspiracy” theory.

kevin_rf | 20/09/2019

China is pushing Ev's because 1/3 of it's oil is improved and they have plenty of coal for electricity production. The Chinese push is as much or more about energy Independence and smog in major cities than CO2 emissions. Either way, Ev's are a win.

kevin_rf | 20/09/2019

1/3 of Chinese Oil is imported, freaking autocorrect...

FactDoc | 20/09/2019


Without Musk, EV market penetrance in the US would have stayed below 0.01%

He changed the Western World.

FISHEV | 20/09/2019

“Without Musk, EV market penetrance in the US would have stayed below 0.01%”@Maxxer

Doubtful as the EU and Asia EV;s would have come to US.

“He changed the Western World”@Maxxer

Well he changed the US car market might be the more accurate statement. US is not the ”Western World” which is a good thing since EU and China are key to world wide EV adoption and Daimler's decision, this topic.

SamO | 20/09/2019

troll meat, troll meat, troll meat for sale

Which of the many mainstream EVs are capturing the public’s dollars?


Lol. Come on . . . The counter factual surrounding this troll are too numerous to list. Plus, trolls get attention by just saying stupid counter factual shit all day long. They don’t need citations, they’re powered by troll juice.

Brawndo's got what trolls crave. It's got electrolytes.

Earl and Nagin ... | 20/09/2019

Europe was smugly driving their diesels. Japan was smugly going with Hydrogen. They, as well as all of the governments of the world all totally fell, hook, line, and sinker, for the deception put up by the ICE industry.
Only Tesla and the US people kept the true solution alive and pushed it, forcing the rest of the world to do the right thing.
Seeing Daimler's decision (I'll only truly believe it when I see a real car from those clowns) seems like Tesla's first big external win. After about 7 years of constant beating by Tesla, I guess Daimler is finally doing the right thing.

jordanrichard | 20/09/2019

For FISHEV and others who think this is all being pushed by government regulations, as if it was a bad thing, do like ABS brakes and airbags......? How about that crumple zone builti to your car,,,,? Those are also government required items.

andy.connor.e | 20/09/2019

"like the $500M loan Tesla got from US government when Tesla was on the ropes."

How about the $50B loan GM got from the US government when they were about to go bankrupt because they suck ass and dont actually build cars people want.

calvin940 | 20/09/2019

Lol.. someone actually tries to compare the 500million assistance vs the multi-BILLION assistance that ICE car manufacturers got to keep them from going dead? Really? You can post that with the straight face? wow. You are really all about an agenda. Nice one.

andy.connor.e | 20/09/2019

Tesla got a loan worth less than 1/4 of the total tax credit incentive for EV purchases which is nearly phased out now. They paid it back fully with interest ahead of time, and GM is here still holding their debt and discontinuing their entire sedan line. Lets keep poking fun at Tesla!

Garyeop | 20/09/2019

At what point will oil stocks be a better short than Tesla? If looking over the next 5 years...might be the way to go for tesla shorts.

3500HDP3D | 20/09/2019

General section topic plz

andy.connor.e | 20/09/2019

the police have arrived?

Spif | 20/09/2019

I'm betting there will still be a a lot of PHEV's being put out in the short term as they sort out battery supply (and other) issues. I'm not sure how these kind of vehicles score on emission targets.

ReD eXiLe ms us | 20/09/2019

But... decidely NOT ending ICE production. SO, Daimler still believes there is money to be made by assembling, deploying, and dispatching ICE vehicles, for now. This stands as a sign, a marker, an indicator that ICE will END... SOON. About [DANG] time.

Earl and Nagin ... | 20/09/2019

This could also mean that they realize that they've pretty much maxed out the performance of the ICE to the point of diminishing returns. Huge additional investments thus far have probably led to ever decreasing performance improvements.
Perhaps they've finally concluded what most of us know: The only way to improve the performance of the ICE is to offload it with a battery and electric motor.
We knew this would happen if we watched a couple of other technologies that were disrupted. Kodak pulled out all the stops to improve the film camera. Among their accomplishments was their APS film which was by far the best user-friendly thing they had ever done. It could be removed from the camera, then put back in. It recorded the exposure info so developers could do a more optimal development, etc. It was too late since the digital camera was just getting better and they weren't.
The steam locomotive industry did the same thing as the diesel-electric was disrupting it. There massive investment into huge efficiency and performance improvements including closed-cycle condensation systems, water scoops, better superheaters, etc. They tried everything, blowing their entire worth, to no avail.
Mark my words, if this isn't that time for ICE, it soon will be.

Bighorn | 20/09/2019

Tesla has the number one selling car of all types in how many European countries now?

TranzNDance | 21/09/2019

Another example of now-dead business: Blockbuster video. Apparently, its CEO was offered $50 million to buy Netflix and he thought it was a joke. Ten years later Blockbuster filed for bankruptcy protection.

Passion2Fly | 21/09/2019
Earl and Nagin ... | 21/09/2019

Yes, but Blockbuster didn't pull out all of the stops to preserve its media rental store business before they died (streamlining, delivery, reduced headcount, better deals, etc.). They just kind of wilted and died without even trying.

jordanrichard | 21/09/2019

FISHEV, your contention was that it is the government intervention that is directing people to buy EVs. You said that there is no demand for EVs except the regulations. Well there was no consumer demand for ABS brakes, air bags, crumple zones.

ReD eXiLe ms us | 21/09/2019

Earl and Nagin: Yes. Ford, Volkswagen, et al have spoken of the 'electrification' of their cars (read: Hybrid, PHEV) leading the way toward 'The FUTURE!' since 2014. I remain convinced that they and others (GM, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Toyota...) fully intend to...

• Deny the necessity and viability of electric drive, repeatedly regurgitating the same old protests they have used for up to forty-five years, including those that have been proven factually incorrect.
• Delay the activation of regulatory requirements for as long as possible.
• Defer any response to those regulatory requirements to the latest possible time and to the lowest allowable level and never above the least common denominator.

As such, I have determined through over three decades of closely watching the traditional conventional legacy ICE automobile manufacturers that they are simply full of $#!+.

Simply looking at the numbers...

□ ~20% Energy Efficiency for ICE
□ ~36% Energy Efficiency for HYBRID
□ ~40% Energy Efficiency for PHEV
□ ~90% Energy Efficiency for BEV

...tells the tale. Gasoline is not and will not be 'eternal'. On both a cents per mile and a five year total cost of ownership basis, BEV beats a contemporary ICE vehicle every time.

vmulla | 21/09/2019

You're right on point. The reason is simple - EVs don't make as much profit as gasoline cars. These are profit-motivated companies.

As the tide shifts and EVs become more market viable these same companies will churn out EVs.

Daimer's move is just a sign that the tide is turning.

FISHEV | 21/09/2019

“FISHEV, your contention was that it is the government intervention that is directing people to buy EVs.”@jordanrichard

You got that wrong also. Try quoting what you are responding to vs. a straw man fabrications.

My point was that the reason Daimler is going EV is due to government regulations in EU and China that sunset gasoline cars. It takes that kind of smart government policies to create a sustainable transportation system because EV’s will likely never compete economically due to the battery costs creating higher initial cost. Even if someday battery costs were competitive with engine costs, we can’t wait for that economic break point. So we have to have political leadership like EU and China which have created a sunset date for gasoline vehicles.

jjgunn | 21/09/2019

because EV’s will likely never compete economically due to the battery costs creating higher initial cost.
Bzzzzz.....Sorry Hans, wrong guess.... Would you like to go for double jeopardy where the scores can really change?


ReD eXiLe ms us | 22/09/2019

vmulla extolled, "...make as much profit..."

Here the thing is... ICE technology is rather ancient. ICE has undergone its entire cycle of imagination, invention, innovation, incremental improvement, and irascible imperfection. ICE is done. Nowhere left to go.

Nearly 140 years of ICE. And electric drive had caught up to what supercars could manage in 1990 by the 2012 launch of Tesla Model S while still achieving the range of circa 1966-1973 gas guzzling pony cars.

I contend that the 'profit motive' is too often used as an excuse to NOT move forward, but instead wallow in mediocrity while claiming excellence. Basically, ICE automobile manufacturers have become complacent and lazy. Rather than taking on the challenge of maintaining power, and improving fuel economy, while simultaneously reducing or eliminating emissions, they threw up their hands, shouted "It's impossible!" and gave up. They chose to cheat, flat out lie, and not even try.

It's not even about being profitable at this point. It is about showing intestinal fortitude and steel in the spine. If it was shown that using twisted rubber bands resulted in a fundamentally better propulsion system for cars, then surely the companies that swear to build 'The BEST CARS in the WORLD!' should be able to use it and prove it. There is more to a car than its engine.

"Aerodynamics are for people who don't know how to build engines." -- Enzo Ferrari

This quote is held dear by automotive historians.

"I build engines and attach wheels to them." -- Enzo Ferrari

Obviously, he thought there was NOTHING to a car beyond its engine. To him, the engine was ALL. The notion of 'improved efficiency' amounted to removing all the things he felt made engines special. He would not have liked Hybrid, PHEV, or fully electric propulsion at all. LOWER displacement? FEWER cylinders? QUIETER operation? Preposterous! None of that could possibly be acceptable.

"What's behind you... doesn't matter." -- Enzo Ferrarri

Let's not reward the fruits of laziness, borne of resistance to change, and ignorance of innovation.

jordanrichard | 22/09/2019

Correct FISHEV, they are doing it for government regulations not consumer demand. That holds true for just about every safety feature in a modern car. The inference you where making and I am sure others would agree, was that there is no demand hence why they are doing it for compliance reasons. You further infer that the government is pushing EVs as if it were a bad thing. To which I then brought up examples of compliance items on cars today.

Tronguy | 22/09/2019

@Red: From hanging around here and watching the Nth attempt by an auto company to keep from doing something new, I think I do understand where you're coming from. But I do have a kind of kind word for those people in the executive boardrooms.
When the boardroom has been driving efficiency in manufacturing of ICE engines for a couple-three generations in order to compete against others doing the same thing, everybody in that boardroom got there by doing just that. Anybody who did stuff that didn't return serious money in a quarter or two was Gone, Out The Door, leaving by a kind of evolutionary process only those who knew how to make cheaper, better ICE engines. And every single live body in that board room had been doing just that for their entire adult lives.
It's bad enough when the people running Disney, which hasn't been around nearly as long as these guys, were found out to be chanting the mantra, "What would Walt do?" at every turn, and Walt had been _dead_ for 15 years when they were doing that. Imagine working at Daimler, or VW, or BWM; the cholesterol in the hardened arteries of these companies must be something to behold.
It's human to not want to disrupt the gravy train, meaning disruption for ones co-workers, employees, and problematic for the long-term survival of the company. Throw into this the, "Nobody within three degrees of personal contacts knows electric" and it's understandable (not right, mind you, but understandable) that none of the legacy car companies want this change in any form or manner.
Musk knows this. And Musk really does want to save the world in a very literal sense. He's said that he doesn't care if Tesla goes bankrupt competing with the Legacy car companies, so long as he's competing against their BEV (or better) cars when it happens.
I look at the situation as a kind of con, with teeth, on Musk's part: If you guys don't build super-duper (compared to ICE) BEV's, Tesla will Eat Your Lunch, your Dinner, and your Breakfast, and Musk will be there to throw the torch on the gas-soaked remains of your companies. Compete, and you and your manufacturing expertise (which these legacy companies _do_ have in spades) get to survive. And the world gets to be a better place.
The "con" part of it is being utterly convincing to these stuck-in-the-mud executives that Musk _will_ do it. And making them change against every instinct they own. Or, rather, making the company change, root and branch.

I can see this, really. I happen to work for a crowd which had its roots in a rather large monopoly. When competition opened up, my management going up about three layers to people who were in their 40's realized that if we were going to survive, we _had_ to compete, and, credit to these people, they made it happen. We did compete; we brought in serious bucks; we gave the competition a very hard time. Didn't fire a ton of people, but made sure that those who were working were _all_ doing constructive, forward-moving work.
But upper management? They played games. Who had the corner office. Who had the groups who were making more money, so they could get their bonuses. Their value added was near zero. And that crowd's dysfunction in a competitive environment darn near brought the house down.
Why didn't the house fall? We got a Board of Directors the head of which was Not from the inside of the company. Given the failures the company was experiencing, the board decided to do something unexpected in corporate America: They started to investigate the performance of the executive suite, starting with the CEO and working their way down. The game players were Out The Door, and good riddance.
And, with the worst offenders gone, almost all of whom had spent the prime of their lives growing up in the old monopoly, the rest of us grabbed our bootstraps, levitated, and the enterprise began to make serious cash. And we're still here.
There was pain, agony, divorces, people fired in droves, families uprooted, people with PhD's working as greeters at Walmart, foreclosures, you name it. But the company came out of it leaner, more agile, and without the deadwood.
So, I do have some sympathy for the BMWs, Mercedes, Volvos, GMs, Fords, and all of the world. Not all of them are going to survive this. Daimler has, no question, taken a major step in the right direction and, in the process, probably will save the company and the company's employees. We can see that it's a step into the light and future profits. For them that was step into the dark and an uncertain future that was very hard for them to do. Kudo's to the people in that boadroom who took that step.

FISHEV | 22/09/2019

"Correct FISHEV, they are doing it for government regulations not consumer demand."@jordanrichard

There you go.

"The inference you where making and I am sure others would agree, was that there is no demand."

Again, quote what people say vs your concocted "inference".

There is a nice demand for EV's but that is very small (10% tops) and would just not get the job done. China and EU (1 and 2 largest car markets) mandated the change by 2040. We have to cut emissions by 80% from 2000 level by 2050.

Daimler is doing what it's two largest customers require.

ReD eXiLe ms us | 22/09/2019

Tronguy: Yes. I understand.

However, I would say the process you describe is not 'evolution' so much as it is in fact 'inbreeding'. I saw the same thing at a company I was at for nearly a decade. I was there nearly two years before it 'clicked'. I realized that what made my job inordinately more difficult than necessary was that the company was run using policies & procedures that had been put into place decades before I arrived. And that exactly NONE of those rules had ever been reviewed, modified, or updated in any fashion by ANYONE since they were put in place.

You see, the company was a Family Business that was run like a Mom & Pop Shop, but masqueraded as a modern international conglomerate. The longtime President of the U.S. arm of the company, who died six or seven years before I started there, was quoted by a Regional Sales Manager as saying, "Trust is good, CONTROL IS BETTER." It was a stifling environment where NOTHING could be done, officially, without being signed off on. Literally on paper.

There were so many RULES. Most of which were broken in a willy-nilly fashion, but only by CERTAIN people. You had to know how, when, where, and for whom which rules were in force before they could be broken. This led to numerous broken promises and ridiculous concessions on price (yet again breaking rules). This led to massive inventory control issues as things just... ~*poof*~ disappeared from time-to-time and others just sat on the shelves for AGES until they were thrown out as scrap. No, not RECYCLED for cash, literally thrown the [FLOCK] away. Because they had been forgotten, replaced, rescheduled, or never bought, then became obsolete.

The long held feuds between department heads over interoffice politics and POWER struggles I didn't care about were no fun either. I had come there from an online company where the philosophy had been that anything YOU can do for the Customer, DO IT. It was incredibly frustrating to work somewhere I didn't have that freedom.

It was a company that prided themselves on hiring very good people, who had been successful elsewhere. But then they plugged those people into their own BROKEN system and told them to 'make it work' somehow, but without making 'too many changes'. It never did.

That place nearly killed me. I was lucky to have escaped with my life. I should have left at least two years earlier.

I have a strong tendency to speak my mind. I will open my mouth to say, "I disagree." then relate WHY. Any place where that behavior is not allowed or encouraged should NOT hire me. Ever.