The modern history of electric Mercedes-Benz models is decidedly weird. It started with the bonkers SLS AMG Electric Drive, pivoted to the Tesla-co-developed B-Class Electric Drive, then returned after a lull with a series of models that looked like fancy Dodge Intrepids. Models like the EQS and EQE were certainly polarizing, so it shouldn’t be surprising that we’re now seeing another change in direction. This is the new electric 2027 Mercedes-Benz C-Class, and you can think of it as the sedan equivalent of the new electric GLC crossover. The drivetrain is actually quite fascinating, but the styling is a blend of everything people don’t like about modern Mercedes-Benz.
Compared to the fairly elegant C-Classes of the past decade or so, this new electric model looks simultaneously gawky and generic. Even beyond gauche details like three-pointed stars in the headlights and that enormous vertical faux-grille, this thing features tall proportions and some fairly generic surfacing. Even with black trim on the sills in an attempt to chop visual height, there’s still a lot of metal to the profile of the new C-Class.
Pair that with a bulbous roofline, and it’s fair to question how the overall look will age. Probably better than the EQS, but it still feels like Mercedes-Benz needs to find its feet again. Oh, and surprise: This thing isn’t a hatchback. You get a mail-slot trunk opening, which seems like a miss when the BMW i4 is already a liftback.
That being said, the heavy-set silhouette of the new C-Class does come with some packaging benefits. Mercedes-Benz was able to expand trunk space from 12.6 cu.-ft. to 16.6 cu.-ft. and carve out additional room in the nose for a frunk. Of course, cutting a silhouette some 5.2 inches longer than the gasoline-powered model helps in that regard, even if an overall length of 192.2 inches means this thing probably shouldn’t be classed as a compact anymore.
The questionable aesthetic choices continue on the inside, with the giant optional 39.1-inch “Hyperscreen” I wrote about last week taking center stage. Not only is it visually enormous, it also comes jam-packed with stuff you probably didn’t ask for, like ChatGPT-4o and Microsoft Bing and Google Gemini. It’s the same stack of AI assistants seen in the new CLA, and while the new C-Class glides along on clean electric power, surely the environmental impact of generative AI puts a dent in its decarbonization efforts.
While the cabin does look a bit richer trimmed out in beige leather and open-pore wood, the infotainment setup overwhelmingly dominates the look in here. How well this setup might age is a legitimate concern, but if you’re simply leasing, that probably won’t matter.
Really, everything interesting on the new C-Class is going on underneath the skin. In the launch-spec C 400 4MATIC model, buyers will get a 94 kWh battery pack hitched to dual electric motors with a disconnect on the front axle and a two-speed transmission on the rear axle. Not only does this pump out a considerable 482 horsepower and 590 lb.-ft. of torque to squeeze the zero-to-60 mph time under the four second mark, Mercedes-Benz claims it offers 762 kilometers, or 473 miles, of WLTP range. For context, a Hyundai Ioniq 6 will do 382 miles on the WLTP cycle, and a Tesla Model 3 long-range RWD will do 466 miles on the WLTP cycle, so Mercedes-Benz is right in the mix.
Unsurprisingly, this is an 800-volt EV so it can take advantage of high-kW stations, pulling up to 330 kW from the right sort of DC fast charger. Oh, and it features 300 kW of regenerative braking. It’s worth noting that the forthcoming BMW i3 promises 900 kilometers or 559 miles of WLTP range along with 400 kW charging, but in the broad scope of the segment, the new electric C-Class is still competitive.
Then there’s the chassis and suspension, which offers something you previously couldn’t get in a C-Class: Optional air suspension. While this does sound like one more complicated system to potentially break in 15 years’ time, Mercedes-Benz has been clever with this application because it should function as an aerodynamic aid. Pulling data from Google Maps, it knows when the car’s on a divided highway and drops the ride height to cut through the air, even when experiencing moderate traffic. It works to complement predictive adaptive dampers that can slacken off if there’s, say, a speed bump ahead. Add in rear-wheel-steering that shrinks the low-speed turning circle to 36.7 feet, and the new C-Class promises a certain level of ease.
Fundamentally, the new electric Mercedes-Benz C-Class seems like a bunch of interesting powertrain technology wrapped up in a package you might not actually want. The powertrain sounds promising, air ride should be super comfy, but the interior and exterior don’t have that instant desirability a Mercedes-Benz ought to have. Plus, when the new C-Class goes on sale in the first half of 2027, it won’t be alone. It’ll have to go up against the new BMW i3 which offers more range and a dashboard that isn’t entirely screen. Decisions, decisions.
Top graphic image: Mercedes-Benz
The giant grille and no front bumper is giving me 300 SEL 6.8 AMG vibes. “Der Neue Rot Sau”
I don’t know if you couldn’t get AirMatic on the last gen of the C but you could get air suspension in earlier C-Classes, I know because it failed on my C350e and left it dropped on its ass
Did Mercedes look at BMW’s styling and think “Oh, yeah, I love the Mutant Beaver look, but can we somehow combine it with a unibrow?”
Dear God that is ugly…
This car seems to be a case of…
“the best view is when driving it bc then I dont have to look at it”
I couldn’t stand driving it because of that massive glowing billboard.
This is exactly what us Mercedes-Benz owners never asked for.
It’s a real lose-lose situation. Look at the exterior styling or look at the 40 inch AI infested TV inside
I took a 2nd look at all the pics above. I guess for me it is the front end ‘face’ that is the most objectionable. Redesign the face so that it has a defined bumper and get rid of the fake grill and ridiculously oversized nostrils and that would go a Long way to improve the looks of the exterior.
Also not a fan of the interior span the width of the car all glass ‘dash’. I certainly pray this techno ‘screens all the things like pimp my ride circa 98’ goes away soon
Yeah, the front is really hurt by the big air scoops. I could even get on board with the grille if they went minimal with the rest of the front and made it a bit of a throwback to the old 300 SEL
Hmmm. I’d be worried all of those AIs would start fighting with each other for my love. Could get messy.
They must have worked REALLY hard to make it look this bad.
Wait….when did Mercedes partner with Mitsuoka?
Is that a Miata under there????
Corolla.
Mercedes designs have been confusing me of late. Mercs were so cool when I was a kid, and my poor ass thought they were the shit. Now, I just think they’re shit. It looks terrible. The interior is basically my worst nightmare. I can’t fathom what is desirable here.
I felt the same about BMW, but I think they may finally be turning a corner design-wise. Mercedes appears to be staying the course straight-to-hell.
Counterpoint….outside of gullwings and pagodas…..has Mercedes styling ever been great?
Yes.
W100
W108
W111 Coupe/Cabriolet
W116 (without the US Bumpers)
R107 (without US Bumpers)
W123
W124
W126
R129
W211
A209
S213
C/A238
W222
C/A217
C/R190
Yes, this right here.
Well, you brought receipts…..granted, I still don’t love most of those, but I concede. Well played.
Outside looks good outside of the headlights. Inside – not a fan of the hyperscreen or the cheaper version with 3 small screens.
The skateboard powertrain means we are fully removed from the tyranny of the hood. I wonder who’ll be the first automaker be to try something radically different. Maybe a cab-forward truck?
They could have made it look like literally anything and they went with… this.
They still need a crash structure ahead of the dash, so that still presents a challenge
Canoo tried a cab forward design on a skateboard – then went bankrupt.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/11/cars/canoo-electric-pickup-truck/index.html
I don’t believe it was the design that caused their bankruptcy.
After all – Fisker went BK twice – and both his cars had big hoods.
Caused – no. I have to think it contributed. Weird doesn’t usually sell.
They eventually dropped work on the truck and focused on their delivery van.
It’s hard to sell something that never made it to public market.
Canoo simply ran out of funding.
Never made it to even finished design. However, running out of money is a sign.
Plenty of EV startups have never made a profit but are still making cars every day and selling them at a loss. Investor confidence is enough that they keep dumping money in hoping for a future return. Lucid and Rivian come directly to mind but I’m sure there are others.
Anyone with half a brain, who wants this car, will only lease it.
Its not a design or execution that will be remotely operable in 10 years. In that sense, its the least “Autotopian” like vehicle possible.
Imagine that dash display scratched to near translucence, random dead pixels, and the last software/hardware engineer who understood how the thing works is on life support in a Colone nursing home. Good luck having a grandparent “gift” to a grandchild.
Its taken the CJDR dealer a month to get to the bottom of a UConnect issue – initially diagnosed a bad cell antenna, replaced that, then diagnosed a bad touchscreen/radio unit, ordered a new one based on the car’s VIN, realized when it came in that it was the wrong part, sent the original one to Stellantis for rebuilding, came back after two weeks having tested fine, no repair needed, now, they’ve isolated the issue to the dash wiring harness.
I’m guessing this is a taste of the future
Exactly.
I have neighbors who are brilliant electro and electro mechanical engineers and they fear these cars. As a rule, they go for the least features possible as these will be the most maintainable.
Between software defined cars and software as a service…can you imagine trying to get one of these to work at 20yrs old.
A 20 year old MB is complicated…but reparable (hydraulic/pneumatic suspensions aside). These things will be paperweights readily recycled for their metals at 20.
Sort of like how the tech CEOs send their kids to schools that do everything in pencil, paper and hands-on.
Check out the NYT Sunday opinion page…there was an article on how “technology” has become a complete disaster for our educational system. The more tech you add…the worse the results.
There is something to pencil, paper, and a non-graphing calculator.
AI is only making this worse.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/19/opinion/schools-edtech-laptops-games-learning.html
When I was in school we weren’t allowed to use a calculator.
2/3rds of new car buyers keep their car for 5 years or less.
Serviceability at 20 years isn’t top on the list for car design. Most don’t make it that long regardless.
Agreed.
In 25 years, imagine what Autopian’s Shitbox Showdown will look like when they put a 2024 Cybertruck against a 2024 Rivian?
No one arguing about CVT vs Automatic transmission issues. Mostly folks chasing down long departed ICs.
Swapping torque wrench issues for soldering iron arguments over exotic solders and chasing around for obsolete battery cells?
I like how MB designers took on the challenge with all their efforts and moved on from the sad blobby fish designs to something even worse.
Honestly I’m sure this is a hot take but I think it looks pretty good. I know the “grille” isn’t functional but it’s a tasteful tribute to past Mercs. The rear end kind of reminds of a Ferrari due to the 4 circular taillights and the black accents…not to mention anything is a huge upgrade from the EQ melted bar of soap design. As a result I think it looks more expensive than it is and the range, power, charging, etc. are all more than competitive.
With that out of the way, what in the Chinese market dystopian hellworld is the interior? I don’t think there’s a single lazier idea in recent years than Mercedes going “fuck it make the entire dashboard and center console a screen”. Does anyone actually want this? I get that the average person is a fucking idiot and that our corporate overlords assume we’re all troglodytes…but are there people out there who walk into a dealership, see this nonsense, and go “I MUST have that”?
I would literally pay extra to have a de-teach’d interior in this day and age and I know I’m not alone. For the love of god and all that is holy, someone just give us some relatively normal luxury EVs…
I do like the front of this one.
Side profile, though, still seems like blobby melted-cheese.
The 30 year old engineer that sits behind me at work drives a C-Class (his 2nd Mercedes) and likes the hyperscreen.
I can’t imagine leaving my job where I stare at screens all day long, to hop in my car and be brutalized by yet more overbearing screen. This is the opposite of luxury in my opinion.
I actually do like the hyperscreen aesthetically, in the same way ultra widescreen monitors are cool. I’ll certainly take that style over any “glue a tablet to the dash” car in existence.
That said, I don’t own an ultra widescreen monitor because functionally it doesn’t make sense for me, and I suspect the same would be true of this.
Jason: you know what this car is ugly AF… I wonder if we could convince just one person to play devils advocate in the comment section to get more interaction on this blog post!?!
David: I bet Nsane would play ball…
Of course I will! I think the enthusiast groupthink gets a little out of hand sometimes and that people don’t give ambitious designs enough of a chance…which is their prerogative, but you can’t have it both ways. If you say everything ambitious sucks then you aren’t allowed to complain when we keep getting gray blobs until the heat death of the universe.
Mercedes was ambitious here. We can argue about whether or not they succeeded (I think the answer is a bit of both), but I respect them really going for it over taking the Audi approach and trying to offend as few people as possible with their designs.
I also (and Uncle Adrian is free to comment on whether I’m correct or a wanker) don’t think there’s anything objectively bad about this design. I also think a lot of folks just blindly hate EVs. My truly hot take is that if they were putting a V8 in it enthusiasts would be ranting and raving about how amazing it is…but we want to have our cake, eat it too, and freeze some for later…
I’ll be the first to praise ambitious designs I don’t like (most Korean stuff) – but I wouldn’t describe this C Class as “ambitious”
To me, it’s the natural progression of their current (failed) design direction. You’re still getting a bar of soap, just slightly nip/tucked in some areas. And the interior is the logical next step to what they’ve been trying to sell for 5 years.
I just see the same old stuff recycled, with little to no innovation. It’s the same for the specs.
Compare that to the i3 which is a total overhaul in everything; design language, interior, software integration, EV tech – and this looks terrible.
I happen to agree with you on all 3 points above and I like both beautiful and ugly cars.
For me it’s just that face to which initially I had a visceral negative reaction.
The fact this has a customer useable frunk or ‘froot’ if you prefer, is proof alone that they are trying over the ‘go to ze’ dealer if ze’ want to open your bonnet’ EQS
I can see what they were trying for, and really like that the direction, but it just isn’t coming together for me. I think the headlights paired with it just don’t work.
Somewhere along the way, were car manufacturers given the OK to make the dash not a soft, forgiving surface?
That’s actually a good question, my knee-jerk answer was ‘because ubiquitous airbags’ but that begs the question – where does the PS airbag deploy from? Does it bust through the display like the Kool-Aid man, spraying tempered glass fragments everywhere like a pineapple grenade?
LOL, I wonder the same thing and have had that thought
It very likely rips though the top of the dash surface like most airbags do today and have done for decades.
I was responsible for the W164 dash and center console produciton.
The passenger side airbag manufacturing process is a delicate dance. For aesthetic reasons designers don’t want the airbag to be visible so it is under the dash surface. We used a laser to do a dot / dash perforation around the perimeter of the airbag to give it a place to cleanly rip through.
However, there is a NHTSA spec on how fast the airbag has to deploy and how much mass of material can be flung at the passenger. Both total mass and the size of each pieces as well. So in the airbag test lab there was a bare unibody for testing with a fine screen to catch any debris. A couple of guys all they did is test airbags all day. Bolt in the dash, pop the bag, analysis the slow mo video, and measure the debris mass. Rise and repeat. Too much debris or too slow of a deployment and everything made between the tests was scrap.
So it was a very fine line. If the laser burned the dashes too deep the outline could be seen. (airbag read-though) and the dash was scrap. Dashes to shallow and it fails the deployment test and a bunch of dashes are scrap. The tolerance for depth was tiny and the laser was burning through a plastic retainer, foam core, and then the finished skin.
Seeing an airbag deploy is wild in real life. They deploy far too fast to see with the naked eye. There is a loud bang and then it is just there – fully deployed.
Here is a video of a M-Class deployment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uC2W2WfHfl8
That’s really interesting, thanks for the info!
I know doctors, lawyers, an IT security director, blue collar people, artists, etc. and not a single person wants all this screen bullshit. People have surprised me by wanting a return to older tech, even people who don’t keep cars very long and they’ve come to me about this because I try not to bore people with car talk IRL. I think a big part of the problem besides short and longterm concerns is that this looks like work. You stare at f’n screens all day, ruining your eyes, and you get into your car to go home only to get your retinas hammered again by this stupidity. And enough of this AI shit in everything that nobody asked for! It wasn’t bad enough to have a moderate-sized display, now the entire thing glares at you like a techno rave demon summoned by influencer parasites from a digital Ouija board. I’d say that ifI saw someone take a bat to the people responsible for all of this, I’d lie in court that I saw nothing, but at this point, with the needless AI, half-assed, lazy, derivative, grossly anti-ergonomic design that goes against human physiology, I think they just have AI designing these things now, and that would require something a lot bigger than a bat. But if someone figures out that bigger bat, I still wouldn’t see a damn thing.
The “3 pointed Stars” in the lights look more like Mitsubishi logos than Mercedes.
Rear ones give me momentary “radiation warning” vibes
Shhh, you’re spoiling the revived Galant.
But seriously the Mitsu-Daimler alliance would’ve been great for this car, imagine it without the barrel grille, with a cheaper dash display, maybe even a liftback, all for $20k less.
$30k less if you throw in cloth seats, analog speedo and steelies with plastic covers.
Several years ago, Ralph Lauren was trying to be “edgy” or whatever and decided to blow the embroidered polo pony logo on the shirts up to giant proportions. The enormous illuminated three-pointed star on that honker of a grille is giving me the same try-hard vibe and it’s just as big a turn-off.
Who’d have thunk it at the time, but the W202 was clearly peak C Class (’92-’01). I know some will say it was the W203 and that isn’t a bad one, but the smaller grill and twinned ovoid headlights never seemed quite right on it.
The new electric C Class (I assume that there’ll be an ICE and/or hybrid version as well?) is awful on the inside, and bulbously generic on the outside. I don’t even care whether it’s an EV or ICE… I wouldn’t want to own/drive either flavor.
I honestly, sincerely, unfacetiously wonder whether Mercedes Benz will ever find its way back to making desirable, respected, and impressively restrained automobiles during my remaining lifetime?
This definitely makes the W203 look like the Alfa Romeo 156 in comparison
Every new Benz design makes me think about what they used to be. I wonder how they got here and my theory is they feel they have few choices. They must differentiate their products in some noticeable way from a Camry in order to charge the premium their brand requires.
The old way they did it costs boatloads of money — yes the switches felt amazing and there was a tangible feeling of solidity and thoughtfulness in the execution of every detail, but a 1991 190e 2.6 was $34,000 which is $84,000 today. That’s uncompetitive if volume is their goal. Their solution appears to be that the car design must ANNOUNCE ITSELF like Rodney Dangerfield in Caddyshack.
I’m glad I’m not in their shoes. A Camry is a nice car, but it doesn’t have a giant digital dash so they’ll do that because it’s “premium.” But everybody knows you can buy a 75″ TV at Best Buy today for less than five hundred bucks so no bump there. What pleasure receptors do Airmatic and rear-wheel steering tickle?
If I were them I’d spend the digital dash money, the multiple projector beam three pointed star money, and the rear wheel steering money on putting the old W126 dashboard, gauges, and switchgear back into the cars. The TV ad: Man driving a car with digital dash. Woman next to him says, “How do I change the temperature?” The man looks at the complicated dash and says, “I don’t know.” Smash cut to same couple serenely driving in a Mercedes with the 126 dash. The woman reaches over and turns the physical temp dial a click. He looks at her, she says, “No questions.”
Their decline really does make me genuinely sad.
BMW took their iconic front end and managed to come up with 2 twin kidney concepts which I think will age well over the next years. Mercedes appears to have responded to the well deserved criticism of their EQ series with “OH YOU DONT LIKE OUR NEW DESIGN?? YOU WANT GRILL?? FINE HERE HAVE ALL THE GRILL”
The potential saving grace is that the sport model grills with potential black trim might look more attractive.
Don’t hold your breath.
I can’t unsee mid-2000’s Impala light bar when I look at dat ass
I can’t see that…because the gddmn locomotive grill is blocking the view.
I agree it’s huge and not elegant but I think they trying to imitate the 70s/80s big chrome bruiser
That would totally work on a large car or SUV, but omg the poor C class! I almost expect it to tip forward its so heavy looking.
Desperately want to photoshop an Audi grill on that thing…There might even be a 1:1 replacement available.
Where the Audi grill has grown on me…this just looks gross.
My thought exactly. The front end looks a lot like the last generation A5, but not as well put together. The headlights are ugly. I don’t mind the three-point stars, but it looks cluttered with the square lamps shoved in.
I knew it was reminding me of something! If you’d remove the heckenblende(sp?), maybe, JUST maybe it’s……less worse?
But yeah, 2002 Impala ass for the win.
Remove a heckenblende??? HERESEY! Hope Torchinsky never reads this comment!
With an aftertaste of mid-2000’s Hyundai Elantra hatchback.
I see that – and also hate it
I was instantly reminded of that too lol
the front and rear designs look like they were done by two different people who didn’t let each other know what they were doing.
the one doing the back was better at the job too.
That’s a low bar.
I actually kinda like the caboose on this thing. but the nose and the interior can fuck alll the way off back to Stuttgart.
I like the more squared off / vertical front end compared to it’s bigger siblings, even if the grill treatment is a bit much (ok, more than a bit).
Can’t say the same for the back, though. Would it still look bad if it was a liftback? Yes. Could I forgive it if it was a liftback? Probably.
The shear amount of metal that exists between the wheel arches and hood/trunk as well as how high the base of both front and rear windshields of these recently released cars like this, or the 5 series, is hideous. It’s gotta be pedestrian safety and aero, right? Cause no designer in their right mind thinks it actually looks good, right? Hard to make a good looking car when the shape is awful; but the styling is horrid too, so…..
I think it’s the electric battery skateboard forcing the whole vehicle to be taller to achieve the same interior space. The Dodge Charger also suffers from this.
This bedevils most EVs which go with the skateboard, some manage to handle it well, others end up with wonky proportions. On the plus side you end up with a usable frunk at least? Hopefully real life pictures will make this look at little better.
Yet others don’t. The Model 3, Ioniq 6, and i4 somehow doesn’t suffer from it near as bad. Both the Taycan and Lucid Air flat out don’t have the issue at all.
Right. It would be one thing if this were the first serious EV sedan, but we’ve had those since the Model S came out fourteen years ago!
Is this replacing the gas C Class line?
I cannot keep up with the naming conventions and would have thought an addition to the lineup would be an “EQC” or similar, unless they have ditched that branding entirely?
They got rid of the EQ branding, and all their EVs will be named the same as their gas counterparts.
The G-Wagen is still listed as the “2026 G 580 with EQ Technology SUV” on the Mercedes website. That and every pre-existing EV model is still EQX in their website. At least they’re finally correcting the ship.
Not completely. Both the electric and gas versions of the next gen C-Class share the same platform (MB.EA). So the next gas (likely hybrid only) C-Class should look the same inside and out but have a functional grill and an engine under the hood.
“Its Slightly Frumpy Skin”
Might want to call a spade a spade on this one. From the front, this is the Elephant Man.
Its like Mercedes saw the Volga 3106 Ataman concept & 3111 sedan and thought, huh, good idea
The butt of a Mazda and the face of an 80s Ninja Turtle. Ouch.
Mazda rear ends look so much better than this piece of post-digested Wurst.
Very true! The taillight treatment feels like they’re encroaching, but doing it much worse.