2012 C Class Crash Test Video

[Smithy53]

2012 Mercedes C class 40 mph small overlap front test

Overall evaluation: Poor

2012 Mercedes C class small overlap test - YouTube

Searched the forum and found nothing.

 

[robtt]

On a quick look at the site vast majority of competitors got same result.That does not excuse the result at all but I have never seen a crash test like this before..it is a very small overlap.The ncap tests give a bigger overlap which will make it easier to dissipate the energy . I am certain all the car makers will now be beavering away to make their cars stronger for this test and the US market !

 

[MercFanUk]

That test is always going to be a difficult one to protect against, essentially you need to find a way to stop the wheel slamming through the cabin - that's got to be an extremely difficult task.

 

[artyman]

Seemed to fare a bit better than the Audi A4 judging by the viedo of that, more deformation of the A pillar and door

 

[grober]

compare the Lexus IS 250!
[YOUTUBE]wnK-TovPgrc&feature=relmfu[/YOUTUBE]

 

[grober]

And the Audi A4
[YOUTUBE]Ob7BhzpPvNY&feature=relmfu[/YOUTUBE]

 

[grober]

With the Merc C class.
[YOUTUBE]pG9h4XMJv6Y&feature=relmfu[/YOUTUBE]

 

[grober]

SEVERAL COMMENTS:- Noticeably the curtain airbags on the Lexus and Merc failed to deploy/ not fitted? whereas the Audi A4's did and judging from the marking helped protect the drivers head at least in the initial de-acceleration stages. That's a brutal test since there is absolutely no give in the " target"object - unlike NCAP which at least has a deformable target front end. I imagine there are some pretty severe/possibly life threatening G forces at work on the restrained passengers in that collision even if the passenger compartment itself remains intact.

ps;_ as an aside such a "one sided" test is going to have markedly different effects from one side of the car to the other and as such may have quite different results for RHD and LHD cars even assuming a "mirror transfer " of driver steering/control gear since many other components do not switch over

 

[crockers]

I think this a very valid test and will make manufacturers make their cars safer to pass it.

Volvo seem to come out well as do Acura (Honda)

IIHS news release

 

[grober]

It always baffles me why after spending millions of dollars on developing new models packed with complex electronic gismos to keep us safe, it would appear all that is required [ in the case of the VOLVO V60 at least- see the video Crockers links to] is an extra foot of high strength steel re-enforcing! It's hardly rocket science. I have also come to the conclusion over the years that well designed transverse engined executive cars seem to fare better in frontal collisions than their fore and aft engined relatives - stronger /wider engine compartment " boxes"?? . This may well be unintentional but does seem to borne out across several models???

 

[st13phil]

I think this a very valid test and will make manufacturers make their cars safer to pass it.

I disagree. This test has all the hallmarks of something very contrived that has little or no bearing on real-world crashes. How many totally non-deformable objects get hit in that way? I don't know, but I'd guess very, very few if any.

The danger of tests such as this is that it drives manufacturers to focus their engineering efforts on making their products perform well in irrelevant scenarios to the exclusion of making worthwhile advances.

 

[st4]

I disagree. This test has all the hallmarks of something very contrived that has little or no bearing on real-world crashes. How many totally non-deformable objects get hit in that way? I don't know, but I'd guess very, very few if any.

.

Trees, lamp posts, ditch where it lands nose first.

Volvo should be commended for the design of their V60

 

[Mr E]

You have to remember that the IIHS is an American insurance assessment centre, and they build their test to respond to the needs of their market.

EuroNCAP does the same, but responding to the needs to the European market.

IIRC (I'm not in the office and don't have access to the data) we have a markedly different accident profile than the US. For example, we see a lot more of collisions during overtaking.

At the end of the day you can't design accidents out of cars. There's also the argument that says the "safer" you make cars, the less carefully people drive (that ol' spike in the centre of the steering wheel argument). And, if OEMs follow the IIHS advice and build stiffer, stronger safety cages, where does the energy released by the collision go?

 

[grober]

Looking at the video the V60 seemed to glance off the target to a greater extent then the others. [ lots more debris also= wheel displaced out from inner wing rather than forced into the bulkhead? ] Side curtain airbag again did well in this model.
[YOUTUBE]eYR5s8bk-8A[/YOUTUBE]

 

[st13phil]

Trees, lamp posts, ditch where it lands nose first.

Trees and lamp posts are not anything like a totally non-deformable object. And that would be one hell of a ditch for a car to land nose first

 

[Moonie]

Trees and lamp posts are not anything like a totally non-deformable object. And that would be one hell of a ditch for a car to land nose first

Look at any tree thats been hit at 60/70mph.

 

[MercFanUk]

Here's a real world example of the kind that this test is trying to replicate (I expect):

 

[GMW]

Wow, The volvo's alloy rim just got ripped off. So does that mean the manufacturers now have to design weaker alloy rims so they break on impact so as not to intrude in the passenger cabin? Would this then mean that even the smallest pothole would require a rim replacement or even worse, does it mean if you hit a big pothole, prepare to have the car flip over as the wheel disengages itself from the front or rear axle!??

From all of those the C-class looked to have the strongest cabin shell, it's only problem being the question as to why the side curtain airbags didn't deploy.