Patman - if the engine is off why is this driver's head reaching a windshield at 136g's at just 36mph? I mean, the car is actually going backwards to does that mean he was listening to heavy metal on the radio? Yeah, that's what you sound like. But notice how that steering wheel didn't even reach the dashboard............? But maybe the airbag split the driver's liver in half, tore apart his aorta and broke nearly every rib even collapsing a lung you ugly soul. Anybody can bitch and judge but this is as black & white as either agreeing to or not agreeing to the force of vehicle acceleration being acknowledged by auto manufacturers when designing high-performance occupant restraint systems. A process AMG bypasses when doing engine swaps............50yrs of performance.........an absolute disgrace.
Can't you understand these simple physics? The power of the engine + the available grip from the tires will give you an acceleration of AT MOST 1G if you have 4 wheel drive. And that's accelerating from a stand still, where your gearbox has the most gearing advantage and you have the most friction available from the tires to generate forward acceleration. The driver was already driving, so he did not have the gearing advantage of 1st gear. Now given that the CL55 is powerful enough to spin its wheels in higher gears, we can sweep that under the rug. But what we cannot sweep under the rug is the fact that it's rear drive on street tires, so you have an acceleration of at most 0.75G. Look at the fastest race cars in the world, Formula 1 cars, their absolute maximum acceleration is about 3Gs. 3 effing Gs, that's peanuts compared to the 136Gs sustained by the driver. Just take a look at how long it takes for a car to accelerate up to any speed, versus how fast it comes to a stop when it hits a wall/obstacle. You want to know why the mercedes engineers are right? And you want to know why the judge's decision to drop the whatever bullshit about F = MA, because F = MA has no business in calculating the force sustained during an impact. You need the equation for IMPULSE. You want to know why? Because F= MA is missing an extremely important component, time. You can't even calculate the forces of a crash using F = MA, because the only variable you have is mass, you don't know net acceleration and you don't know the force generated by the impact. Remember, to get the force using MA you need the net acceleration. If you are on a rocket who's motor can only push you up at a gross +9.8 m/s^2, you are not moving at all, because you are accelerating upwards at the same rate as gravity is pulling you back down, so the net force is a big juicy medium-rare zero.
Let me give you another example, just to try and make you understand. Imagine you are traveling at whatever speed limit your nearest highway has. And imagine you crash into a very large sponge that could slow you down over a very long time. You would be fine, no airbags would deploy, you could drive away from that crash. Now imagine you hit a building, the only thing you'll be driving in is an ambulance. According to your physics, you would either be fine in both crashes or dead in both. You're missing an important component, TIME. The 136Gs don't come from the relatively slow speed of the car upon impact, they come from the few milliseconds it took to stop. Impulse. Here's an other example. Imagine you're jumping off a 1 story tall building. In one attempt, you jump into a foam pit, and because it was so much fun you go and do it again. Now imagine you jump onto the concrete driveway. What do you think will happen? Splat or bounce?
I'm flying to germany and buying everyone at Daimler AG a beer for having to put up with claims such as yours.