Mercedes EQE SUV vs Xpeng G9L
Mercedes EQE SUV leads 6 to 4
Biggest differences: DC charging — Mercedes EQE SUV 170 kW, Xpeng G9L 540 kW · Charging 10–80% — Mercedes EQE SUV 32 min, Xpeng G9L 12 min · Boot — Mercedes EQE SUV 520 l, Xpeng G9L 935 l.
Mercedes EQE SUV
The Mercedes EQE SUV is an all-electric SUV in the E segment, offering three different drive configurations and battery capacities.
Xpeng G9L
The Xpeng G9L is a seven-seat E-segment SUV: a 110 kWh battery, a WLTP range of up to 591 km and 540 kW DC charging.
Profile against the market: Mercedes EQE SUV vs Xpeng G9L
Mercedes EQE SUVEQE 500 4MATIC
Xpeng G9LRWD Long Range
Mercedes EQE SUV or Xpeng G9L — who wins where
Mercedes EQE SUV leads 6 to 4
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmMercedes EQE SUV +6 km
- Battery kWhXpeng G9L +14 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmMercedes EQE SUV −1.8 kWh/100 km
- Power PSMercedes EQE SUV +82 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sMercedes EQE SUV −2.3 s
- Top speed km/hMercedes EQE SUV +10 km/h
- DC charging kWXpeng G9L +370 kW
- AC charging kWNo difference
- Charging ↓ minXpeng G9L −20 min
- Weight ↓ kgMercedes EQE SUV −85 kg
- Boot lXpeng G9L +415 l
Technical data: Mercedes EQE SUV vs Xpeng G9L
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Mercedes EQE SUV EQE 500 4MATIC | Xpeng G9L RWD Long Range | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 597 km | 591 km | Mercedes +6 km |
| Battery | 96 kWh | 110 kWh | Xpeng +14 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 19.3 kWh/100 km | 21.1 kWh/100 km | Mercedes −1.8 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 170 kW | 540 kW | Xpeng +370 kW |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 11 kW | No difference |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 32 min | 12 min | Xpeng −20 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 13.1 km/min | 34.5 km/min | Xpeng +21.4 km/min |
| Voltage | 400 V | 800 V | Xpeng +400 V |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 449 PS | 367 PS | Mercedes +82 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 4.7 s | 7 s | Mercedes −2.3 s |
| Top speed | 210 km/h | 200 km/h | Mercedes +10 km/h |
| Drivetrain | AWD | RWD | different type |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 2615 kg | 2700 kg | Mercedes −85 kg |
| Boot | 520 l | 935 l | Xpeng +415 l |
| V2L (external power) | No | Yes | only Xpeng |
| Length | 4863 mm | 5120 mm | Xpeng +257 mm |
| Width | 1940 mm | 1999 mm | Xpeng +59 mm |
| Height | 1707 mm | 1788 mm | Xpeng +81 mm |
| Wheelbase | 3030 mm | 3100 mm | Xpeng +70 mm |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Mercedes EQE SUV
Xpeng G9L
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Mercedes EQE SUV
Xpeng G9L
Other comparisons in this class: SUV, segment E
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Why does the Xpeng G9L have a bigger battery but a shorter range than the Mercedes EQE SUV?
The Xpeng G9L carries 110 kWh and covers 591 km, while the Mercedes EQE SUV with its 96 kWh battery does 597 km. Energy use decides it: 21.1 against 19.3 kWh/100 km.
How do the drivetrains of the Mercedes EQE SUV and the Xpeng G9L differ?
The Mercedes EQE SUV has AWD and 449 PS. The Xpeng G9L has RWD and 367 PS.
Which one can power appliances from a socket (V2L)?
Only the Xpeng G9L — its 110 kWh battery then works as a power source. The Mercedes EQE SUV, with 96 kWh, does not offer it.
Which has the bigger boot?
The Xpeng G9L takes more: 935 l against 520 l in the Mercedes EQE SUV. The difference is 415 l.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.