S-Class W223 Mercedes-Benz S-Class (W223) Facelift 2024

[Merc1]

Which means you had no point to begin with. Just a lotta bullshit rambling. Trying to pass off your silly options as facts and failing.

M

 

[mr.Mister]

Which means you had no point to begin with. Just a lotta bullshit rambling. Trying to pass off your silly options as facts and failing.

The fact that you instantly equate 'I rest my case' with 'I had no point' says more about your inability to process nuanced conversation than it does about my argument. I shared personal, real-world experience (Unlike you, I’ve actually driven all of these cars — multiple times, on the same route!) — something you're clearly unfamiliar with, considering how desperately you cling to magazine specs and sanitized test data like gospel.

But sure, keep quoting corporate-fed car reviews as if they're sacred scripture. Some of us live in the real world, not on spreadsheets. You didn't dismantle my point — you just refused to comprehend it.

There's a difference between disagreeing and being willfully obtuse. You’ve firmly planted yourself in the second camp. Congrats.

 

[Merc1]

The fact that you instantly equate 'I rest my case' with 'I had no point' says more about your inability to process nuanced conversation than it does about my argument. I shared personal, real-world experience — something you're clearly unfamiliar with, considering how desperately you cling to magazine specs and sanitized test data like gospel.

But sure, keep quoting corporate-fed car reviews as if they're sacred scripture. Some of us live in the real world, not on spreadsheets. You didn't dismantle my point — you just refused to comprehend it.

There's a difference between disagreeing and being willfully obtuse. You’ve firmly planted yourself in the second camp. Congrats.

First of there was no nuance to anything you’ve said here. No one is clinging to magazine “specs”. There is no such thing as a magazine “spec”. It’s called test data. Yes I’ll go with them because you have an agenda and you haven’t provided anything factual to begin with, only word of mouth. There are members here who actually show the things that they experience with actual hard data, not this “because I said so” bullshit that you present. Even if it’s a pic of a readout from both cars on the same route on the same day, it would be more that what you have provided.

You haven’t proved anything other than being an annoying fool that can’t stop talking. Until you actually prove your claims you have no point. Every single testing source I have seen says that opposite of what you’re saying. Prove otherwise. No one lives off of spreadsheets, I’m talking about one specific thing here not the entire car.

There is a difference between proving a point and just repeating it hoping it will stick. All you do is the latter. Try again. Willfully obtuse? Says the person that thinks every testing source is on some payroll to make Mercedes look great when some don’t even like Mercedes? Again, got that mirror handy? Typically when one starts posting memes they’ve lost the plot.

M

 

[mr.Mister]

First of there was no nuance to anything you’ve said here. No one is clinging to magazine “specs”. There is no such thing as a magazine “spec”. It’s called test data. Yes I’ll go with them because you have an agenda and you haven’t provided anything factual to begin with, only word of mouth. There are members here who actually show the things that they experience with actual hard data, not this “because I said so” bullshit that you present. Even if it’s a pic of a readout from both cars on the same route on the same day, it would be more that what you have provided.

You haven’t proved anything other than being an annoying fool that can’t stop talking. Until you actually prove your claims you have no point. Every single testing source I have seen says that opposite of what you’re saying. Prove otherwise. No one lives off of spreadsheets, I’m talking about one specific thing here not the entire car.

There is a difference between proving a point and just repeating it hoping it will stick. All you do is the latter. Try again. Willfully obtuse? Says the person that thinks every testing source is on some payroll to make Mercedes look great when some don’t even like Mercedes? Again, got that mirror handy? Typically when one starts posting memes they’ve lost the plot.

M

The irony is almost impressive. You accuse me of having 'no nuance' while delivering a wall of text desperately trying to invalidate firsthand experience with secondhand data.

Yes, I shared my observations — multiple real-world drives, same cars, same route. That’s called anecdotal evidence, and while it's not peer-reviewed, it is rooted in actual use, not just lab conditions. That’s something you still haven’t addressed — probably because you can’t.

You pretend to care about 'proof', but what you really want is for everyone to submit to whatever test result you’ve cherry-picked. Meanwhile, you're the one tossing out personal insults like confetti — as if that makes your argument stronger.

The truth is simple: some people talk from experience, others Google louder. I know which camp you’re in.

You're not debating — you're deflecting. Try again... calmly this time.

 

[Merc1]

The irony is almost impressive. You accuse me of having 'no nuance' while delivering a wall of text desperately trying to invalidate firsthand experience with secondhand data.

Yes, I shared my observations — multiple real-world drives, same cars, same route. That’s called anecdotal evidence, and while it's not peer-reviewed, it is rooted in actual use, not just lab conditions. That’s something you still haven’t addressed — probably because you can’t.

You pretend to care about 'proof', but what you really want is for everyone to submit to whatever test result you’ve cherry-picked. Meanwhile, you're the one tossing out personal insults like confetti — as if that makes your argument stronger.

The truth is simple: some people talk from experience, others Google louder. I know which camp you’re in.

You're not debating — you're deflecting. Try again... calmly this time.

So actual test data from the real world is second hand but what you say here isn’t? You literally can’t make this up. One of the more idiotic things I’ve seen written here in a while. All of it is second hand here since no one can verify what you or they have done. When journalists test cars they do it in the real world just as you claim to do. This has nothing to do with a test lab. So you have failed to discredit them yet again. I’m not talking about the EPA I’m talking about actual testing data - real world. You failed again and I see nothing from you other them more writing. Anecdotal evidence? You just proved my point, it isn’t reliable enough to draw a broader conclusion from in most cases. Do you even know what it means? Wow. Take your foot out your mouth.

M

 

[Merc1]

The irony is almost impressive. You accuse me of having 'no nuance' while delivering a wall of text desperately trying to invalidate firsthand experience with secondhand data.

Yes, I shared my observations — multiple real-world drives, same cars, same route. That’s called anecdotal evidence, and while it's not peer-reviewed, it is rooted in actual use, not just lab conditions. That’s something you still haven’t addressed — probably because you can’t.

You pretend to care about 'proof', but what you really want is for everyone to submit to whatever test result you’ve cherry-picked. Meanwhile, you're the one tossing out personal insults like confetti — as if that makes your argument stronger.

The truth is simple: some people talk from experience, others Google louder. I know which camp you’re in.

You're not debating — you're deflecting. Try again... calmly this time.

You mentioned Google:

“Anecdotal evidence is a personal account, story, or isolated example used to support a claim, rather than systematic, scientific data. It is often persuasive because it is relatable and emotional, but it is considered unreliable evidence because it lacks controlled variables, a large sample size, and can be subjective and prone to bias, memory errors, or exaggeration. As a result, anecdotal evidence cannot establish cause and effect and is often a logical fallacy, as one person's experience doesn't represent the broader reality.”

M

 

[mr.Mister]

So actual test data from the real world is second hand but what you say here isn’t? You literally can’t make this up. One of the more idiotic things I’ve seen written here in a while. All of it is second hand here since no one can verify what you or they have done. When journalists test cars they do it in the real world just as you claim to do. This has nothing to do with a test lab. So you have failed to discredit them yet again. I’m not talking about the EPA I’m talking about actual testing data - real world. You failed again and I see nothing from you other them more writing. Anecdotal evidence? You just proved my point, it isn’t reliable enough to draw a broader conclusion from in most cases. Do you even know what it means? Wow. Take your foot out your mouth.

M

You’re now circling around definitions like that’s going to change anything. Yes — all evidence online is technically secondhand unless you're there. The difference is, I’m speaking from actual personal experience, and you’re quoting other people’s experiences and pretending it’s universal truth. That’s the entire point — which you keep missing in spectacular fashion.

Journalists test cars? Sure. Some are good, some are biased, some chase headlines. It’s not sacred just because it’s written. But keep calling it 'real world' and pretending it magically cancels out context.

I don’t need to 'discredit' anything. I simply shared my own experience. That alone threatens you more than it should — maybe because deep down, you know specs don’t always tell the full story.

But hey, if you want to keep yelling into the void demanding proof from a stranger on a forum, go for it. I’m not here to win an argument. I was here to share. You turned it into a courtroom.

Relax. Touch some grass. Or better yet — drive both cars.

 

[mr.Mister]

You mentioned Google:

“Anecdotal evidence is a personal account, story, or isolated example used to support a claim, rather than systematic, scientific data. It is often persuasive because it is relatable and emotional, but it is considered unreliable evidence because it lacks controlled variables, a large sample size, and can be subjective and prone to bias, memory errors, or exaggeration. As a result, anecdotal evidence cannot establish cause and effect and is often a logical fallacy, as one person's experience doesn't represent the broader reality.”

M

Ah yes, the classic copy-paste Google definition. Very educational — thank you for that. Unfortunately, understanding the definition doesn’t mean you’ve understood the context.

Anecdotal evidence is limited, sure — but it’s also how people form real-world opinions every single day. That’s why people test drive cars instead of just reading charts. You seem obsessed with turning a casual, experience-based observation into some kind of peer-reviewed thesis. Wrong setting.

If you think quoting definitions makes you right, you’re missing the forest for the trees. Again.

But hey — keep Googling. Maybe you’ll eventually find a definition for 'missing the point entirely'

 

[Merc1]

You’re now circling around definitions like that’s going to change anything. Yes — all evidence online is technically secondhand unless you're there. The difference is, I’m speaking from actual personal experience, and you’re quoting other people’s experiences and pretending it’s universal truth. That’s the entire point — which you keep missing in spectacular fashion.

Journalists test cars? Sure. Some are good, some are biased, some chase headlines. It’s not sacred just because it’s written. But keep calling it 'real world' and pretending it magically cancels out context.

I don’t need to 'discredit' anything. I simply shared my own experience. That alone threatens you more than it should — maybe because deep down, you know specs don’t always tell the full story.

But hey, if you want to keep yelling into the void demanding proof from a stranger on a forum, go for it. I’m not here to win an argument. I was here to share. You turned it into a courtroom.

Relax. Touch some grass. Or better yet — drive both cars.

And what you shared doesn’t prove shit. Nor does it jive with other real world accounts. That’s the point you keep missing. Yours is the outlier. Repeating doesn’t make it so. The opposite of what you’re saying is the actual majority. Sure if you can’t grasp that. What journalist is chasing headlines by saying a S500 and S580 get the same mileage? Another really out of it comment. Journalists don’t test fuel economy in a lab. It’s real world when they say what they observed. Just like you. Now you’re a stranger on a forum? Full of shit like I said.

M

 

[Merc1]

Ah yes, the classic copy-paste Google definition. Very educational — thank you for that. Unfortunately, understanding the definition doesn’t mean you’ve understood the context.

Anecdotal evidence is limited, sure — but it’s also how people form real-world opinions every single day. That’s why people test drive cars instead of just reading charts. You seem obsessed with turning a casual, experience-based observation into some kind of peer-reviewed thesis. Wrong setting.

If you think quoting definitions makes you right, you’re missing the forest for the trees. Again.

But hey — keep Googling. Maybe you’ll eventually find a definition for 'missing the point entirely'

You mentioned Google, just thought you’d like to see that it undermines your argument now you’re trying to backpedal from what it says because it proves what you’re saying doesn’t mean much beyond you.

M

 

[mr.Mister]

And afar you shared doesn’t prove shit. Nor does it jive with other real world accounts. That’s the point you keep missing. Yours is the outlier. Repeating doesn’t make it so. The opposite of what you’re saying is the actual majority. Sure if you can’t grasp that. What journalist is chasing headlines by saying a S500 and S580 get the same mileage? Another really out of it comment. Journalists don’t test fuel economy in a lab. It’s real world when they say what they observed. Just like you. Now you’re a stranger on a forum? Full of shit like I said.

M

You’re clearly frustrated, and at this point, it’s no longer a discussion — it’s just noise. You keep trying to force consensus where there is none, as if the majority opinion automatically invalidates lived experience.

And yes, I’m a stranger on a forum — exactly why your emotional tantrum over what I experienced is so bizarrely intense.

You don’t need to agree with me. You just need to accept that not everyone’s experience will align with the spreadsheet in your head. That’s life.

Anyway, this has run its course. You’re not here to understand — just to be right. Have fun with that.

 

[mr.Mister]

You mentioned Google, just thought you’d like to see that it undermines your argument now you’re trying to backpedal from what it says because it proves what you’re saying doesn’t mean much beyond you.

M

You really are trying hard to declare victory on my behalf, huh? Cute.

No backpedaling happened — just your ongoing inability to differentiate between dismissing something and contextualizing it. You pasted a generic Google definition and acted like it was a mic drop. It wasn’t. It was a dictionary entry. Good job.

Anyway, I think we’re done here. You're clearly not interested in a discussion — just in arguing with the idea that someone had a different experience than you. That’s not a debate. That’s ego.

Now take a breather. Or better yet, go drive both cars and find out for yourself.
Wild concept, I know.

 

[Merc1]

You really are trying hard to declare victory on my behalf, huh? Cute.

No backpedaling happened — just your ongoing inability to differentiate between dismissing something and contextualizing it. You pasted a generic Google definition and acted like it was a mic drop. It wasn’t. It was a dictionary entry. Good job.

Anyway, I think we’re done here. You're clearly not interested in a discussion — just in arguing with the idea that someone had a different experience than you. That’s not a debate. That’s ego.

Now take a breather. Or better yet, go drive both cars and find out for yourself.
Wild concept, I know.

Nope, you were just proven wrong by your own words. Now I guess it’s a full T denial, delusional exit left. You stated that the Mercedes I6 and V8 burn the same amount of fuel because of your anecdotal evidence that doesn’t jive with other real world accounts. Actual testing. Not a lab. That’s the whole story. Must have been a mic drop because you’re now looking for an off ramp. Anecdotal doesn’t mean anything beyond you and you certainly can’t draw the conclusion that the I6 burns the same amount of fuel as the V8 in all situations based on your experience. Try again.

M

 

[mr.Mister]

Nope, you were just proven wrong by your own words. Now I guess it’s a full T denial, delusional exit left. You stated that the Mercedes I6 and V8 burn the same amount of fuel because of your anecdotal evidence that doesn’t jive with other real world accounts. Actual testing. Not a lab. That’s the whole story. Must have been a mic drop because you’re now looking for an off ramp. Anecdotal doesn’t mean anything beyond you and you certainly can’t draw the conclusion that the I6 burns the same amount of fuel as the V8 in all situations based on your experience. Try again.

M

Ah, the sixth desperate repetition. Still convinced that if you say it enough times, it becomes true. That’s not how logic works — but I wouldn’t expect you to know that.

I never claimed the I6 and V8 always consume the same fuel in all situations. Only someone starved for a fight would twist a personal observation into that. And here you are — throwing a tantrum over someone else’s experience like it personally offends your worldview.

You don’t want a discussion. You want submission. Sorry to disappoint.

Now go ahead — get the last word in. Copy-paste a few more definitions. Declare victory. It won’t change the fact that this entire meltdown started because someone dared to say: 'I’ve driven both and noticed X.'

Let that sink in. Then go touch some grass. Or maybe… get a driver’s license and try it yourself.

 

[Merc1]

Ah, the sixth desperate repetition. Still convinced that if you say it enough times, it becomes true. That’s not how logic works — but I wouldn’t expect you to know that.

I never claimed the I6 and V8 always consume the same fuel in all situations. Only someone starved for a fight would twist a personal observation into that. And here you are — throwing a tantrum over someone else’s experience like it personally offends your worldview.

You don’t want a discussion. You want submission. Sorry to disappoint.

Now go ahead — get the last word in. Copy-paste a few more definitions. Declare victory. It won’t change the fact that this entire meltdown started because someone dared to say: 'I’ve driven both and noticed X.'

Let that sink in. Then go touch some grass. Or maybe… get a driver’s license and try it yourself.

Ahh the ultimate backpedal. You absolutely did make the claim that there was no point in having an I6 because it burned the same amount of fuel as the V8. Now you’re backpedaling from you claim. Got it. Nope, I want proof of your claims. Which you can’t provide. It’s just hearsay at best. Other members provide a look into their real world experiences, why can’t you in order to prove your claim. If you’re going to say that there is no advantage to having the I6 economy wise you need to be able to articulate and prove why. All your lame retorts don’t change that some fact. Your initial post left out “IMO”. Then we would know where to put it.

M

 

[mr.Mister]

Ahh the ultimate backpedal. You absolutely did make the claim that there was no point in having an I6 because it burned the same amount of fuel as the V8. Now you’re backpedaling from you claim. Got it. Nope, I want proof of your claims. Which you can’t provide. It’s just hearsay at best. Other members provide a look into their real world experiences, why can’t you in order to prove your claim. If you’re going to say that there is no advantage to having the I6 economy wise you need to be able to articulate and prove why. All your lame retorts don’t change that some fact. Your initial post left out “IMO”. Then we would know where to put it.

M

You’re clinging to semantics now because you’ve got nothing left. Whether I wrote 'IMO' or not doesn’t change what everyone on a forum already understands — it’s a personal take. You’re demanding scientific proof from a stranger sharing a driving experience. That’s not debate. That’s desperation.

What’s even funnier is that if you actually read what I wrote — properly — you’d have noticed I very clearly specified when the I6 burned the same as the V8:
▶ higher speeds on the highway
▶ with more passengers
▶ on inclines
▶ and especially in city driving, where stop-and-go means repeatedly pulling a nearly identical weight with significantly less power — mostly in 1st and 2nd gear.

I even tried to explain the physics behind that, but that clearly flew right over your head too.

You’ve spent half a dozen comments arguing against something that was never stated the way you imagine it. And yet, here you are, still trying to win a courtroom battle that exists only in your head.

I could provide a spreadsheet, GPS logs, fuel receipts, and a notarized statement — and you’d still be in here foaming at the mouth, shouting 'backpedal!' because anything that doesn’t align with your narrow expectation clearly must be invalid.

This was never about facts. It’s about you not being able to accept that someone else had a different experience — and worse, dared to share it.

Enjoy the echo chamber, champ. Maybe next time, try arguing something you actually understand instead of desperately clinging to internet bravado.

 

[Merc1]

You’re clinging to semantics now because you’ve got nothing left. Whether I wrote 'IMO' or not doesn’t change what everyone on a forum already understands — it’s a personal take. You’re demanding scientific proof from a stranger sharing a driving experience. That’s not debate. That’s desperation.

What’s even funnier is that if you actually read what I wrote — properly — you’d have noticed I very clearly specified when the I6 burned the same as the V8:
▶ higher speeds on the highway
▶ with more passengers
▶ on inclines
▶ and especially in city driving, where stop-and-go means repeatedly pulling a nearly identical weight with significantly less power — mostly in 1st and 2nd gear.

I even tried to explain the physics behind that, but that clearly flew right over your head too.

You’ve spent half a dozen comments arguing against something that was never stated the way you imagine it. And yet, here you are, still trying to win a courtroom battle that exists only in your head.

I could provide a spreadsheet, GPS logs, fuel receipts, and a notarized statement — and you’d still be in here foaming at the mouth, shouting 'backpedal!' because anything that doesn’t align with your narrow expectation clearly must be invalid.

This was never about facts. It’s about you not being able to accept that someone else had a different experience — and worse, dared to share it.

Enjoy the echo chamber, champ. Maybe next time, try arguing something you actually understand instead of desperately clinging to internet bravado.

Nope, longer post won’t change it. Let’s see the proof as you fail forward in backpedaling from your original claim. You can’t prove anything and the posts are getting longer and longer but you aren’t saying anything new. Let’s see it. The actual facts say your experience is an outlier, the rest of that is just projection. Try again. You can’t make the claim for not needing the I6 based your singular experience. Remember, anecdotally.

M

 

[klier]

Wow.....

*slowly backs off*

 

[mr.Mister]

Nope, longer post won’t change it. Let’s see the proof as you fail forward in backpedaling from your original claim. You can’t prove anything and the posts are getting longer and longer but you aren’t saying anything new. Let’s see it. The actual facts say your experience is an outlier, the rest of that is just projection. Try again. You can’t make the claim for not needing the I6 based your singular experience. Remember, anecdotally.

M

You keep demanding proof as if I owe you a scientific paper. This is a forum — not a peer-reviewed journal. I shared my real driving experience, clearly explained the conditions, and even tried to clarify the physics behind it.

If you only accept 'facts' when they fit your narrative, that says more about you than it does about me. Keep living in your echo chamber of 'actual facts' while dismissing anything that challenges your worldview.

I’m done repeating myself for someone who refuses to listen. Good luck with that.
And finally — maybe you’d benefit more from trying to understand before you start lecturing, instead of being a forum philosopher who knows everything but understands nothing.

 

[Merc1]

You keep demanding proof as if I owe you a scientific paper. This is a forum — not a peer-reviewed journal. I shared my real driving experience, clearly explained the conditions, and even tried to clarify the physics behind it.

If you only accept 'facts' when they fit your narrative, that says more about you than it does about me. Keep living in your echo chamber of 'actual facts' while dismissing anything that challenges your worldview.

I’m done repeating myself for someone who refuses to listen. Good luck with that.
And finally — maybe you’d benefit more from trying to understand before you start lecturing, instead of being a forum philosopher who knows everything but understands nothing.

What part of other members share their experiences with actual evidence don’t you understand? So then no you have nothing. Just as I thought. Nope. There are a lot terrible facts about Mercedes we all readily except and agree they need to improve upon. Yours in the other hand isn’t factual. It’s your opinion only and can’t cancel out a whole engine because of it. It’s nonsense.

M