Why can that not simply be captured as a cost to the user at time of purchase? Why does it need to be a subscription?

Why do they need a fucking green man (circuit chip) in a car I own that obeys only their remote services to unlock this feature?

Basically - Either I own the fucking thing, in which case I have all the keys, or I'm just licensing access. Let's not fuck around with this awful gray area where companies try to weasel out of consumer protections.

For sure if you own the car, you can modify it.

Tesla has been doing something similar for a while on the extended range model 3 where you can pay a one time fee to get a boost in performance.

Interestingly, there is a Canadian company that has reversed engineered what happen when it is unlocked and is selling a device that you plug on the car CAN bus and you get the same performance boost. They obviously sell this for less that what Tesla charges and as far as I understand, the only risk is that you might void your warranty if Tesla "catches" you doing it.

So I kind of agree that it seems similar to getting a factory approved chip tuned. When you chiptune your ICE car, you will often pay several hundred euros for a shop with the right hardware to modify your car (and loose your warranty). In this case, if the setting change is increasing failure rate but your warranty is not affected maybe it's not such a bad deal.

> Why does it need to be a subscription?

this is an attack on the used car market

Correct - In my opinion it's pure rent-seeking behavior. There is no benefit to the buyer, and it dramatically erodes the concept of the first-sale doctrine.

It's quite intentional - it's bad behavior - I'd like it see it made fucking illegal as soon as possible.

---

We're in this weird period where manufacturers have realized that software controls on embedded circuits allow them to retain far more control over devices than they should ever be given the right to have.

The last stop on this train is clearly digital slavery - you own nothing, everything around you is a subscription or licensed access. The moment you stop paying - the device degrades, not because it has to, but because it's the stick they use to beat more money out of you.

I want legislation passed fucking yesterday that states that I must be provided ALL of the damn keys to a device when I buy it. I don't give a fuck whether that key is physical or digital. I get them all, or the manufacturer gets fucked out of existence.

Because most people don't sit there doing 0-60 in 2.2s, but would like a car they don't have to drop off prematurely at the garage for a drivetrain overhaul?

If that is the case you should get the choice, enable the feature for free but lose warranty, enable and keep warranty at the subscription cost, and then enables automatically for free once warranty is up.

To me, the current subscription model seems like you are trading the "joy" of paying extra money for the reward of greater engine wear. Maybe the increased performance is worth it for some, but the economics doesn't make sense.

That is why it can make sense. If you prefer the longer engine life, then the system will limit you so you get that. If you prefer the performance, then pay for it.

The above assumes - probably incorrectly - that Mercedes will repair the car as part of this, and thus the increased cost mostly represents their costs in more repairs needed. If you have to pay for repairs, then it should be a one time fee.

I don’t know of a way that a manufacturer and a consumer could allow a buyer to voluntarily “lose warranty” with a software toggle installed and offered by the manufacturer, without running into complications with the laws around automobile lemon laws. One constructed example to demonstrate the problem might be, “They claim to have provided a switch that voided the warranty and my three year old flipped it in the car’s mobile app when I wasn’t paying attention, I want a full refund for my car now”.

Yeah, this isn't necessarily a gouge. Could be a pretty cool way to expose design decisions/wear envelope to the end user.

I prefer the one-time purchase to subscription models for big-ticket purchases though. I don't like the mental overhead involved with addons.

This is the only circumstance in which it would be acceptable to me as an owner of that hardware.

If this were the justification, then why can't you have it for free at the end of the warranty period?

FYI; intel is pushing a subscription model for … cpus.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-finalizes-intel-on-d...

This is incorrect. It’s a one time only fee.

I'd pay a flat fee for faster acceleration, but not a recurring fee.

Why would you assume good intent for an obvious money grab? When people obviously behave in bad faith we have an ethical obligation to call them out. Mercedes is behaving badly. Don’t apologize for them.

If there were an acceptable reason for this, they could have said it here: https://shop.mbusa.com/en-us/connect/pdp/Acceleration-Increa.... They chose not to, which means either there is no danger associated with this change, or there is and they're selling a dangerous add-on without informing customers.

"Wears out your car faster" isn't necessarily dangerous to the occupants.

100% it's this.

I've been in the room when making this exact kind of product proposal (not MB). The pushback from drivetrain and electrical on warranty, repair, battery life etc was intense and directly related to future satisfaction. Sure, you can push the envelope on the spec, but it does tend to come at a cost.

Say they give this option for free... And it reduces the battery life/capacity by 10% over the course of a year. Pretty sure people would be clutching their handbags in horror.

You buy a car with a spec. Aftermarket mods are definately a thing to increase that spec, and they've been around for a while, both for ev and ice. They've always been available at a cost. This time it's from the MFG and we all lose our minds.

Yes and no. People who know what they're doing will replace failure points proactively - upgrading cooling systems, upgraded connecting rods, stronger wrist pins, etc. I had a car pushing 900+ WHP that had fewer powertrain issues than my buddy's stock 240 BHP truck.

Generally, modding anything beyond the ECM / TCM / PCM will be visible to the service center and claims will be denied.

If you stick to software alone, you're generally not looking at more than maybe 15-50 hp difference in most cars, depending on your starting point (you're getting a small percentage increase, so more powerful cars will see more of an increase).

Most ECM / PCMs do not have adequate tamper protection to detect being modded and then flashed back to stock, which is a common practice in the auto enthusiast world, and leads to people who technically shouldn't be getting repairs under warranty to get them.

Newer ones are getting better at detecting this.

"... leads to people who technically shouldn't be getting repairs under warranty to get them."

They can only deny a warranty if the modification caused the damage. However, they can claim it did and deny you even if it's not true.

Leaving you basically only two options payup or pay lawyers and court fees ect.. to sue them.