Storm. - 8/13/2004 6:35 PM
old cars did't really have very good crumple zones so the passengers would suffer the impact quite badly, thats why new cars deform alot in even a minor accident.
Also cars are faster now,.... an drivers are nuttier!
I agree with this statement, but only to a point. American cars of older vintages, yes and Mercedes-Benz pre-1959.
But Mercedes-Benz models W111, W108, W109, W116 and W126 and a lot of other models combined effective crumples zones with extremely tough and strong passenger safety cells, therefore energy transfer to the passengers was minimalized.
Fine then, take a 2004 Chrylser Sebring and then send it to have a head on collision with my 1981 W126 300SD turbo or even my 1978 W116 450SEL - I would not want to be in the Sebring, which is for all intents and purposes a "modern car". Let me take the votes, who'd want to be in the the W126/W116 or the Sebring?
"Produced as the sucessor to the 220, the 230 and the 230S were shown at the 1965 Frankfurt Auto Show. The car was on the same 106.3-inch wheelbase as the 200 series and the 186.5-inch overall length was identical. In these models, special attention was paid to safety, the front and rear ends designed to yield on impact thus protecting the passengers in the strongly constructed interior. Perhaps this was why these finned Mercedes were so numerous in the war zone of Beirut."
-Mercedes, the Enduring Legend; on the W111
The W126 and W116 are the precise definitions of "full strength build" - and the 126 was specifically designed for head on and offset head on collisions.
What do you guys think?
1990 560SEL - W126
-929 nautical blue metallic & 262 navy blue leather
-58,000 KM (36,200 Miles)
-Euro spec Japanese import (KAT edition)
-Complete service history since new
-5,546cc SOHC 16v V8
-285 hp@5200 rpm, 324 lb/ft@3750 rpm
-2.65 limited slip diff