Mercedes-Benz Maker Remains Open to 'Different Types' of Collaboration With Apple

[MrUNIMOG]

Actually Google has done a ton of work on driverless cars for a few years now, I think their engineers came up with the spinning thing on the roof that everyone uses in their development vehicles. So yeah Apple are copying Google.

And that car I posted is Road legal and isn't going to be racing, its purpose is a lot more serious then 'racing at walking pace'
Watch the video about it, they have had it driving on public roads, and will use it to help work out how they will be insured like if you're robot kills someone who's liable.

Well ok then, I was wrong about that thing being just one of those desert race robots. It really looks like one though. If you've watched the video yourself, then you might have heard the guy even talk about the DARPA challenge (the robot desert race I was referring to), when explaining where the spinning laser scanner on the roof came from.

So Google's done a ton of work on driverless cars for a few years? That's cute, Daimler (Mercedes-Benz) has been working on that since the early 90's... Now they're not only testing autonomous cars but also trucks on public roads, and not some fancy futuristic vehicles but modified production models, because they already have most of the necessary sensor technology built in for all the current safety and assistance systems. The 2016 production E-Class will be capable of driving autonomously on the highway up to 200 km/h (124 mph), and they're expecting to have a fully autonomous production vehicle by 2020.

That "spinning thing on the roof" that "everyone uses" is nothing we'll see in a self-driving production vehicle, it simply looks too ugly and is just not necessary. Daimler and other car manufacturers working on autonomous vehicles don't use that in their prototypes either, their prototypes can barely be distinguished from standard vehicles from outside.

THIS is how you make a self-driving car:

I suggest you watch this video:

Sure, that's a short marketing clip so they don't really go into the details, but unfortunately videos where engineers are talking will mostly be in german. If you have 15 minutes, maybe just watch the car driving in real traffic:

And now what exactly do you mean by "Apple are copying Google"? We don't even know wether Apple is planning to enter the car industry or wether they're working on a self-driving vehicle... And if they did, how would that be "copying Google"? Is Google copying Daimler then? I don't even think Google is planning a production vehicle though, that's probably not what their research is aimed at.

 

[Custommm]

Owning a Sprinter 2013, I deeply wish Apple stay clear of Mercedes... Mercedes are real unreliable POS. Check Rating on Consumer Reports and other rating source like :http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32332210 REMEMBER JUST AN UNRELIABLE POS!

 

[apolloa]

Well ok then, I was wrong about that thing being just one of those desert race robots. It really looks like one though. If you've watched the video yourself, then you might have heard the guy even talk about the DARPA challenge (the robot desert race I was referring to), when explaining where the spinning laser scanner on the roof came from.

So Google's done a ton of work on driverless cars for a few years? That's cute, Daimler (Mercedes-Benz) has been working on that since the early 90's... Now they're not only testing autonomous cars but also trucks on public roads, and not some fancy futuristic vehicles but modified production models, because they already have most of the necessary sensor technology built in for all the current safety and assistance systems. The 2016 production E-Class will be capable of driving autonomously on the highway up to 200 km/h (124 mph), and they're expecting to have a fully autonomous production vehicle by 2020.

That "spinning thing on the roof" that "everyone uses" is nothing we'll see in a self-driving production vehicle, it simply looks too ugly and is just not necessary. Daimler and other car manufacturers working on autonomous vehicles don't use that in their prototypes either, their prototypes can barely be distinguished from standard vehicles from outside.

And now what exactly do you mean by "Apple are copying Google"? We don't even know wether Apple is planning to enter the car industry or wether they're working on a self-driving vehicle... And if they did, how would that be "copying Google"? Is Google copying Daimler then? I don't even think Google is planning a production vehicle though, that's probably not what their research is aimed at.

Firstly I did not know that DARPA are going to to race robot cars across a desert, not that this was why the car I posted was built but anyway I didn't know that.

Secondly, it's not cute Google has been working on driverless cars since 2009 according to this: http://www.automatedvehicleinstitute.org/googledriverless.html it is a fact.

This has nothing to do with Mercedes, they started in the 80's on project Prometheus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eureka_Prometheus_Project

But it was not relevant to my comment, so not sure why you raised that? The spinning laser module on the car roof is how the computer sees. Sure it's not necessary but again I never said that? I merely stated Google developed it.
It's great to see Mercedes still working on self driving cars, good for them, I still can't see Apple joining them but rather BMW.

And as for the copying google, you need to read the story this thread is linked to, it's about eco systems, I can bet google, as stated, want an eco system including cars and Apple is following, copying, competing. That is what I meant, and that is not something Mercedes are working on.

And I would still take a Bowler Wildcat self driving car over any Mercedes S class any day

 

[MrUNIMOG]

Firstly I did not know that DARPA are going to to race robot cars across a desert, not that this was why the car I posted was built but anyway I didn't know that.

Secondly, it's not cute Google has been working on driverless cars since 2009 according to this: http://www.automatedvehicleinstitute.org/googledriverless.html it is a fact.

This has nothing to do with Mercedes, they started in the 80's on project Prometheus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eureka_Prometheus_Project

But it was not relevant to my comment, so not sure why you raised that? The spinning laser module on the car roof is how the computer sees. Sure it's not necessary but again I never said that? I merely stated Google developed it.
It's great to see Mercedes still working on self driving cars, good for them, I still can't see Apple joining them but rather BMW.

And as for the copying google, you need to read the story this thread is linked to, it's about eco systems, I can bet google, as stated, want an eco system including cars and Apple is following, copying, competing. That is what I meant, and that is not something Mercedes are working on.

And I would still take a Bowler Wildcat self driving car over any Mercedes S class any day

Alright, seems like I misinterpreted what you stated. To me it seemed like you were praising Google for "inventing" the self-driving vehicle and branding everyone else working on similar projects as copycats.
By "that's cute" I didn't mean to take away from Google's efforts, but merely wanted to put the "few years" into perspective to Daimler's (and other's) much longer experience in that field. But since you already knew about Project Prometheus, that was probably redundant.

 

[apolloa]

Alright, seems like I misinterpreted what you stated. To me it seemed like you were praising Google for "inventing" the self-driving vehicle and branding everyone else working on similar projects as copycats.
By "that's cute" I didn't mean to take away from Google's efforts, but merely wanted to put the "few years" into perspective to Daimler's (and other's) much longer experience in that field. But since you already knew about Project Prometheus, that was probably redundant.

I think what they have done is great yes, but it would be a bit worrying if American tech companies beat actual car manufacturers to car tech!!

I'll tell you what was worrying was one guy in one of the Bowler videos was explaining, how you could perhaps press a button and for a small FEE let the car drive you through a city etc.....
Good ol capitalist world never missing an opportunity to make a quick buck, but somehow I don't think the guy's idea would catch on, however who knows?

As for Apple, it's obvious they are working on some car related project, but weather it is a full car or not I'm certainly not sure, it seems that car manufacturers DO want Silicon Valley companies to help them but where Apple fits in I'm not sure.
I think that first off electric cars need to take off, so an infrastructure of charging stations can be built up.

EDIT::
I watched your videos by the way, interesting how Merc use a radar system as opposed to the laser system. I think Merc will make self driving limos to begin with and have a good market, Google seems to be going after something you may rent in a city? Or they could be taxi's?

 

[AppleScruff1]

I think what they have done is great yes, but it would be a bit worrying if American tech companies beat actual car manufacturers to car tech!!

I'll tell you what was worrying was one guy in one of the Bowler videos was explaining, how you could perhaps press a button and for a small FEE let the car drive you through a city etc.....
Good ol capitalist world never missing an opportunity to make a quick buck, but somehow I don't think the guy's idea would catch on, however who knows?

As for Apple, it's obvious they are working on some car related project, but weather it is a full car or not I'm certainly not sure, it seems that car manufacturers DO want Silicon Valley companies to help them but where Apple fits in I'm not sure.
I think that first off electric cars need to take off, so an infrastructure of charging stations can be built up.

But Apple car owners would be happy to pay fees so the car would drive them through a city. All they would care about is how much profit Apple makes. I joke, but for some here that would undoubtedly be true.

 

[MrUNIMOG]

I think what they have done is great yes, but it would be a bit worrying if American tech companies beat actual car manufacturers to car tech!!

Do they? I don't think so... Seems to me Daimler is still leading the field by quite a bit.

I'll tell you what was worrying was one guy in one of the Bowler videos was explaining, how you could perhaps press a button and for a small FEE let the car drive you through a city etc.....
Good ol capitalist world never missing an opportunity to make a quick buck, but somehow I don't think the guy's idea would catch on, however who knows?

As for Apple, it's obvious they are working on some car related project, but weather it is a full car or not I'm certainly not sure, it seems that car manufacturers DO want Silicon Valley companies to help them but where Apple fits in I'm not sure.
I think that first off electric cars need to take off, so an infrastructure of charging stations can be built up.

We can agree that it's obvious Apple is working on something car-related. But for now I strongly doubt that they plan on developing an actual vehicle. But we'll see, whatever it turns out to be it will probably be super exciting.

 

[dontwalkhand]

Owning a Sprinter 2013, I deeply wish Apple stay clear of Mercedes... Mercedes are real unreliable POS. Check Rating on Consumer Reports and other rating source like :http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32332210 REMEMBER JUST AN UNRELIABLE POS!

I can't speak of the Sprinters but my 2003 C240 is going strong at 153,000 miles with nothing but regular oil changes, brakes, and tires. My dad's ML320 had 450,000 on the clock before he got hit head on by a semi truck and survived. I say having it be made by Mercedes would make it very reliable and safe at that.

Unlike the 2002 BMW X5 we had that had nothing but electrical problems.

 

[winston1236]

I think that eventually the carmakers will start stealing Apple/Google car interface designers and go their own route. It just doesn't make sense to outsource that.

 

[campyguy]

Maybe/maybe not written elsewhere in this thread is, now that M-B is one of the new owners of NAVTEQ's mapping data, Apple can get their hands on another data source than the crap that is TomTom/Teleatlas...

 

[campyguy]

Wrong. Lithium is about as common as Chlorine in common salt, and batteries need tiny amounts of it. Nickel, Cobalt, Manganese are the current battery cost drivers.

While you may - or may not - have a point, I've worked with lithium for over 25 years in industrial settings (including Boeing and two transit agencies) - it's often regulated, and more often banned from those workplaces as lithium and its derived components are toxic. I have shut down an entire machine shop more than once when a tube of lithium grease shows up in a work station, and had to follow up with the regulating state agency with more paperwork than I care to mention here.

And, AFAIK, most of the lithium that is mined with the intent of being used for automotive battery products originates in Canada, is shipped to and processed/refined in China, then shipped to destinations around the world (Canada, Japan, US, Mexico, Germany). The "cost effectiveness" comparisons from an environmental impact of a Prius and a Hummer (also now a Chinese-made product) still ring true, given the cost of mining/processing/properly disposing of spent lithium. Yeah, I deal with this stuff, going back about 30 years... No offense intended.

 

[satcomer]

Apple + Smart. I can see it now. Plastic, rust-free, any-color-you-want exterior panels, with a contrasting, 3-layer-steel Tridion roll cage, a nice CarPlay (iOS In The Car) headunit, and most of all, self-driving ability.

Plus, Apple was reportedly interested in the way more quirky BMW i3...

Furthermore, while the new gas model [from Daimler-Benz] is due this Fall, the Electric Drive and Cabriolet versions are seeing a production run starting next year. Kind of makes you wonder what major changes the electric is undergoing in that extended timeframe.

Just like most every small Electric car made so far, 100 Miles range in the best conditions.

 

[MrUNIMOG]

Just like most every small Electric car made so far, 100 Miles range in the best conditions.

100 miles? That's what, like 180 kilometers? More than enough for a small city car...

 

[satcomer]

100 miles? That's what, like 180 kilometers? More than enough for a small city car...

But what about the Grandparents that live in the middle of nowhere?

 

[MrUNIMOG]

But what about the Grandparents that live in the middle of nowhere?

A smart fortwo obviously isn't the ideal vehicle for a 500 km trip to your grandparents, whether electric or not... If you have to travel distances like that more frequently, you wouldn't get a smart. And if it's once a year perhaps you'd just rent a larger vehicle for that.

 

[retep42]

Wrong. Lithium is about as common as Chlorine in common salt, and batteries need tiny amounts of it. Nickel, Cobalt, Manganese are the current battery cost drivers.

After a bit of digging, I have to say you are correct about the abundance of Li. And on top of that, even though it mostly occurs in low concentrations, is less common than other elements, is used in more than 'tiny amounts' in car batteries and it not always easy to handle as a previous poster pointed out, there are indeed credible studies out there concluding that Lithium abundance will not be the issue with car battery production. Price and safety may be different stories, but that wasn't the point. Now I just have to remember who tried to sell me on the Lithium shortage, so I can track them down...

 

[retep42]

I've heard it multiple times, but here's one of the first results on Google:
http://gatewayev.org/how-much-electricity-is-used-refine-a-gallon-of-gasoline

They say every gallon of gas requires 6 kWh of energy.

The Tesla Model S 70D gets 240 miles out of a 70 kWh battery. That means that with 6 kWh, it can get:

(240 miles / 70 kWh) * 6 kWh = 20.6 miles.

So using 6 kWh of energy, you could produce one gallon of gas, which would drive, say a BMW M5, 21 miles. (Source: http://www.caranddriver.com/bmw/m5 - I picked that because multiple reviewers compared the Model S to that car.)

Or you could just put that energy straight into a Tesla Model S going 20.6 miles, no intermediate storage involved.

Thank you for the reference. So that is credible, but it never states that those 6 kWh were in the form of electrical energy. Instead it is calculated to be the heat content (enthalpy of combustion, i.e. chemical energy) of the crude oil that is lost compared to the heat content of the gasoline refined from it. It first needs to be converted into electrical energy in order to be entered into the rest of your argument. If you use a heat engine (ICE, turbine, etc.), you are hampered by the maximum thermodynamic efficiency of heat engines. Granted, large stationary heat engines under constant load conditions can be built with higher efficiencies than the engine in a car, but the limit is still far below 100%. Furthermore you have to consider losses in the transmission and storage of the electrical energy, so I think in the end it is probably a wash. In principle, you could circumvent the thermodynamic limits of heat engines by using fuel cells, but no fuel cell known to man can run on crude oil, so that is not of much help here.

In summary, while I personally agree with you that we should not use crude oil in any form to power cars, the argument that indirectly oil-powered electrical cars are ecologically better than gasoline-powered cars does not work here at all.