W202 safety?

[m1tch]

Hi everyone,

I have been looking around for possibly a Merc W203 C220 CDI in the summer, but I am getting tempted by some of the W202 cars as they have simpler and better engines with regards to overengineering vs the newer mercs that have quite a few electrical issues etc.

I was just wondering how badly the W202 does in a crash, I know that the NCAP score wasn't amazing, but it can't be used to compare against newer cars due to different tests etc and there is quite a bit of car to get through to get to the cabin.

I am just wondering if looking at a W202 would be ok from a safety aspect.

Just had a look on benzworld and apparently they are very study and was built like old school Volvos, whereas the W203 had corners cut with build quality, although has more electrionics with regards to safety:

http://www.benzworld.org/forums/mb-safety-testimonials/1291816-w202-crash.html

 

[timk]

Hi everyone,

I have been looking around for possibly a Merc W203 C220 CDI in the summer, but I am getting tempted by some of the W202 cars as they have simpler and better engines with regards to overengineering vs the newer mercs that have quite a few electrical issues etc.

I was just wondering how badly the W202 does in a crash, I know that the NCAP score wasn't amazing, but it can't be used to compare against newer cars due to different tests etc and there is quite a bit of car to get through to get to the cabin.

I am just wondering if looking at a W202 would be ok from a safety aspect.

Speaking from experience, the W202 is a tough car. Had an accident two months ago in mine. At about 70mph on a dual carraigeway, a side impact lifted my car into the air over the front of another (a case of someone pulling into the fast lane and not looking) and took out my steering and nearside suspension. Sounds dramatic, but apart from seatbelt bruising and a jarred left leg, and a lot of shock, I walked away. It's an old school Merc and they are strong.

 

[trapperjohn]

SCHUDE - Member on here - had a a nasty run in with the motorway barriers in his 202. Walked away no bother. I saw the wrecked car. Passenger cell perfect.
SCHUDE may have some pictures?

 

[grober]

I was always puzzled by the Euro NCAP test results on the W202 which seemed very much at odds with MERCEDES highly developed safety technology. I know with the W202 C class specific design decisions were taken to lower the major impact bearing structures in the body shell of the car and this may have adversely affected the car's performance in the very specific NCAP test. A slightly different test might have yielded a better result?? That said the absence of a high level strong chassis leg /inner wing structure capable of feeding suspension loads from the top of a MACPHERSON strut "type" front suspension may have something to do with it also.

 

[Dieselman]

Or it could just be that they aren't as safe as people think...a bit like Volkswagen being reliable.

 

[Shude]

SCHUDE - Member on here - had a a nasty run in with the motorway barriers in his 202. Walked away no bother. I saw the wrecked car. Passenger cell perfect.
SCHUDE may have some pictures?

The pics are all still on this forum.

I rolled a 202 back in 2003 and spun one on the motorway back in 2009. Both times there was no intrusion into the passenger area at all and I walked away with no injuries. No other vehicles were directly involved in either crash though!

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/general-discussion/1280-accident-pics.html
http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/driving-incidents-roadrage/78874-thatll-need-more-than-t-cut.html

 

[st4]

Or it could just be that they aren't as safe as people think...a bit like Volkswagen being reliable.

A lot of Skoda drivers would disagree with that one...

I imagine they were good in their day crash wise, but I'd sooner put my neck on the line in a more modern car.

 

[Dieselman]

A lot of Skoda drivers would disagree with that one...

Ironic that the Skoda's beat the VW cars hands down on reliability.

Regards older supposed safe cars, does anybody remember the Volvo 940...built like tanks and super safe..

[YOUTUBE]qBDyeWofcLY[/YOUTUBE]

 

[wemorgan]

At best old cars are 'ok' in a crash test, but as in all cars a crash is obviously best avoided.

Switchable seat belt load limiters, multi-phase airbags, knee bolsters, curtain airbgs etc etc are becoming the norm on even a budget family car. None of the above as far as I know are on the W202.

I'm not saying don't buy a W202, just don't think you're driving an indestructible tank of a car.

 

[219]

Unless you get a W126

YouTube - Australian Mercedes-Benz S Class commercial - late 80s

YouTube - fifth gear - motorway pile up

 

[clk208]

Ironic that the Skoda's beat the VW cars hands down on reliability.

Regards older supposed safe cars, does anybody remember the Volvo 940...built like tanks and super safe..

No doubt that safety in cars has improved over the years but can't help thinking the test result in that clip would have been very different if the cars had hit full head on rather than sort of half way.

As it is the Volvo is taking the full impact of the Renault on the drivers side half only due to the improved design of the safety cell on the Renault. I would also expect there to be very little difference in safety performance between these 2 cars in a sort of motorway pile up scenario or a side impact.

 

[219]

Or it could just be that they aren't as safe as people think...a bit like Volkswagen being reliable.

My aircooled Beetles were always reliable .

My feeling is that newer cars with al their electronic gizmos have too much to go wrong and are less reliable as a result .

 

[wemorgan]

Not everyone has the luxury of choosing the type of crash they will have. The EuroNCAP front test is an off-set test because that is more typical than a full frontal. I imagine thi is due to people steering to avoid a crash before impact.

Regarding side impact tests I would say that this is an area that has seen greater improvements that frontal. Just compare the size of B-pillars and sills of modern cars to 80s cars. Then it's not only the size of the structure but the materials used within them. Only in more recent years have dual-phase and ultra high strength steels been available. The door trim is also optimised to more evenly load the occupants ribs. All of which is a step change from 20 years ago.

 

[artyman]

My Skoda Octavia was reliable, but then so have at least the last eight cars I've owned. Whilst back in the old days motoring was an adventure, when breaking down from time to time was expected, I can't recall the last time it happened to me. However whereas I could probably have fixed most problems back then I wouldn't have a clue with all the modern electronic sensors and gizmos, I can remember getting in from work and doing a head gasket swap before tea, aah... those were the days

 

[Scott_F]

...I can remember getting in from work and doing a head gasket swap before tea, aah... those were the days

Must have been a BMC A or B series engine !

 

[markjay]

You seem to be considering the strength of the body shell, but more modern cars are also safer from many other aspects, such as active safety system e.g. airbags and pre-tensioners, plus they are better at avoiding a crash i.e. ESP, BAS, etc.

So newer cars are generally safer overall for a variety of reasons, and if safety was your main concern that buy the newest model you can get.

Said that... the early W203 do have a reputation for unreliability and rust (as do most Mercs of the era) , and the W202 is probably safe enough, so on balance a good W202 may prove to be a better buy than an early W203.

But if your budget stretches to a facelift W203 i.e. 2005-2007, then this would be your best bet - my 2006 W203 has not missed a beat and I can't fault it.

 

[horgantrevor]

what people seem to forget is new cars are made to fold and fall apart in a crash to get rid of all that force on impact

old cars dont do as well in that department

but hears the crux


if your in an old merc and you hit a new car the old car may come out better you may not and the new one you will smash it and kill the people in side depending on size of car too car and point of impact

 

[219]

Mercedes-Benz pioneered the principle of having front and rear crumple zones , together with a rigid passenger safety cell with the Ponton series of the 1950's .

This was a Mercedes-Benz innovation which has been copied by many other makers and a prime example of why Mercedes were regarded as 'the safest car on the roads' in the 1960's - something that Volvo's marketing people picked up on later .

The crumple zones absorb much of the energy of a collision , controlling the deceleration of the vehicle before the forces are passed on to the occupants inside . I can attest to the fact that it works , having been in a head-on half-frontal crash some years ago ( in my W115 ) and walked away from it .

Cars such as the Renault , which effectively have a rigid battering ram across the front , are dangerous on two counts and , in my opinion , ought to be banned . These cars are designed to pass the crash tests , not to protect the occupants , and are also a menace to other road users in more responsibly designed cars .

The rigid girder across the front reduces deformation in this area , this means that the crumple zone will not deform as much , hence less intrusion into the passenger cell , but it also means that the zone will not crumple progressively , thus controlling deceleration . It will , of course , use the crumple zone of another vehicle to arrest motion , at the expense of the other vehicle , but when these vehicles hit a solid object such as a tree or a concrete motorway bridge support , the forces of deceleration will be passed to the occupants in a much more abrupt manner , greatly increasing the risks of internal injuries .

Sadly , airbags etc are no substitute for good , solid engineering : they will do no good if the vehicle is crushed around you ; I have attended a number of fatal crashes involving modern vehicles where airbags deployed , but the vehicle still folded up like a pack of cards leaving no space for the occupants . This is despite some of these vehicles having very thick pillars which must greatly reduce visibility ( particularly the A pillars , which in many cases reduce visibility approaching junctions and must actually contribute to some crashes ) .

I chose my S-Class primarily because I wanted a large , safe car for me and my family and which was strong enough to withstand the impact of being hit by a selfishly designed Renault or similar . While I accept that a newer S Class will be safer than an older one due to added safety features , I still feel safer than I would be in a smaller , newer car with less substance around me .

Responsible car design will also minimise the damage done to others . A well designed car will , of course , be more able to avoid that crash in the first place .

 

[wemorgan]

Derek, I think some of your points might be a little outdated now.

The rigid girder is the bumper beam and serves two main purposes. It protects the car in low speed accidents ~10mph. It will deform in isolation to the rear structure and because it's a bolt on/off component it makes cars cheaper to repair than otherwise. Secondly it ties the left longitudinal member to the right longitudinal. This is important in a high speed accident as it allows greater stability to the collapsing longitudinal. Try squashing a long thin can of say Red Bull. It will more naturally just fold in half which is an inefficient use of the structure. Give it some lateral stability and it will progressively fold many times.

Crash tests are both structure assessments and occupant injury assessments. OEMs are not able to achieve good EuroNCAP ratings by having good structure at the expense of the occupants.

The issue you raise is more relevant to comparability which is seen where dissimilar vehicle impact. This is both an issue of new cars of different height and mass but also of new cars impacting old cars having different strength.

 

[markjay]

NCAP often remind us that their scores are only comparable for cars in the same class, but not across classes - and that overall the larger/heavier cars are still safer.

But having said that, the OP is asking about two cars of similar size - W202 and W203.