AMG's Airbag & Integrated Seatbelt Issues - Page 15 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #141 of 285 (permalink) Old 05-31-2013, 07:55 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
After 2-weeks of testing this cl55 for consistent power (and a new throttle body assembly due to inconsistent power/cutting off at 5k rpms too), it's become clear that on June 11, 2006 we were traveling at a mere 25-28mph when the driver braced on the throttle initiating that very effective automatic downshift into the sweet spot of 1st gear.

At 30mph it's holding the 2nd gear (which is boggish). At 25-28mph it lights up like a rocket (the same event that inadvertently lunged us out of our lane a few moments prior). Now I have to figure out how to produce that kind of acceleration from a dead stop. Even though it's 0-60' time is 1.9-2.0sec on street tires w/full pressure, it just doesn't match that sensation of a neutral-drop affect upon an automatic downshift (like the kompressor is charged/spooled up). I anticipated this process for over 1/2-decade now. And yet it's the saddest experience that a sole survivor could possibly imagine. Why a company like Mercedes Benz would deny Newton's 2nd Law of Physics (F=ma) and call me a liar and incompetent engineer. Soon, a website will be launched that'll database corporate behaviors such as this one across a variety of products & services so customers can choose who to support. This isn't just about one crash test anymore, this is about ethics and fundamental decency. Unless Mercedes-Benz knows something Izac Newton did not.....

Factually speaking when there are two equal and opposite forces acting against each other (decceleration from the collision and acceleration from the rear tires), the bumper accelerometers (2) caught between the crumpling limo (we were spearing thru) and the CL55 compacting itself from rear wheel power will not detect enough decceleration to timely deploy the airbags. I've already heard that a driver should not brace on the accelerator and not every circumstance can be designed for. Yet we have a situation where one man was able to predict in a long moment (a second before your death is still a lifetime) that a design fault will occur. And we have a very simple solution of mechanical-electrical sensors telling the airbag computer that metal is crumpling without decceleration being sensed. It was the 3rd sensor in the firewall that finally triggered the airbags and by then we impacted the dashboard. How Mercedes-Benz can claim that their airbags deployed timely and saved my life with a steering wheel pressed into the dashboard by a driver with a ravaged front-body cavity (broken rib cage, collapsed lung, sliced up liver and aortic), a living passenger with numerous limb-breaks and 2-front seat occupants with documented rear/top head injuries is nothing short of a sin, especially when coupled with their denial of Newton's 2nd law of physics against a collision pulse (claiming acceleration has no affect on the pulse of a collision 'whatsoever'). Now i have to decide if this frontal barrier test will be at 30mph, partial or full frontal, the amount of 'cushion' material on the barrier (representative of another vehicle's absorption), and if we can approach from a rolling start for a realistic power output. I just cannot believe a company such as Mercedes-Benz will still not sit down with me and go over this in an objective format. They should call NHRA and tell them there's no reason to require helmuts when you break into the 13's, roll cages and 5-point harnesses when you break into the 11's, certified roll cages and so on...... Something even AMG acknowledged between the 2009 and 2010 SL Black Series vehicles (removing seats w/integrated seatbelts for a shoulder harness connected directly to an integrated rollcage). We all know big companies play big games, but there's a limit to such disgrace, lies, and outright irresponsible behavior from a manufacturer against anybody supporting AMG vehicles.

Last edited by virage105; 05-31-2013 at 08:15 PM.
virage105 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #142 of 285 (permalink) Old 06-08-2013, 12:20 PM
BenzWorld Veteran
 
Triggerhappy's Avatar
 
Date registered: Nov 2009
Vehicle: 1978 240D
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 648
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Okay, you MUST be trolling, but on the off chance you're serious,

Quote:
Originally Posted by virage105 View Post
acceleration has no affect on the pulse of a collision 'whatsoever'
That's right! You claim to be an engineer and don't understand this? High school physics man!

By your logic then any car capable of going fast should be illegal, or have a roll cage. A 2013 Chevy Spark (MSRP $16,000) is capable of over 100mph. The NHTSA only requires crash testing at 40mph. Does this mean that the spark should have a roll cage and that the drivers should wear helmets, just in case they choose to take the car to its top speed and crash?

Again, on the off chance that this is a serious topic, you need to let go of this crash. You're never going to find what you're looking for because it doesn't exist. Get some counseling about it and move on.
Triggerhappy is offline  
post #143 of 285 (permalink) Old 06-08-2013, 05:44 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Please explain how expending $40k on a vehicle and crash test qualifies as "Trolling". And please explain how crashing at 100mph and a crash test under a CL55's maximum rate of acceleration at 35mph (not even 40mph) are associated.

On your "existing" point, I'll pass on replying to that. Since you are doing some counseling already and present yourself a master of high-school physics, please visit Realcompany.org - Dedicated to Simple Truth - Home and bless us with your logical answers to the questions posed.

This is a subject that involves the crash testing of two vehicles at a fixed velocity (35mph) at 2-different accelerations rates. One is at 0ft/s2 (or m/s2 - 2 meaning 'squared') and the other is at the maximum acceleration rate of an exotic powered vehicle whether a CL55 or a Yugo powered by a Saturn 5 rocket. If you had to sit in either crash test, which one would you choose and why? Mercedes has claimed there is no difference and I'm an incompetent engineer to think there is. Newton defines laws of motion identifying Forces created by a velocity vector and by an acceleration vector. Do you believe the latter doesn't exist in a Mercedes? I have nothing against high powered vehicles, been toying with them on land and mostly on water for over half of my life. I just believe any competent engineer who is capable of modifying a sedan should also be capable of modifying the occupant restraint system of that sedan. As Mercedes did from their 2009 to their 2010 SL black series. This isn't rocket science but you have to be knowledgeable enough to understand the difference between acceleration and going 100mph....before attempting to mock me over this relatively simple and straightforward subject. My friend believed and airbag would timely deploy and braced for it. I believed otherwise and the outcome is a given. Look forward to your answers to the questions posed at Realcompany.org - Dedicated to Simple Truth - Home beneath the documentary photographs and statements pertaining to each segment of this topic/event.
virage105 is offline  
post #144 of 285 (permalink) Old 06-09-2013, 01:06 AM
BenzWorld Veteran
 
Triggerhappy's Avatar
 
Date registered: Nov 2009
Vehicle: 1978 240D
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 648
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
I just read your link and to be honest, it looks like Mercedes gave very good answers. I didn't see any problems with their conclusions.

The matter of an accelerating vehicle vs a vehicle moving at a constant speed is meaningless. At the moment of impact, what matters is the instantaneous velocity (the velocity at that very second) of the vehicle. Its momentum is mass times velocity, so at the second of impact the momentum is the same whether the vehicle was previously accelerating or not. Once the impact begins the car will not continue accelerating because within the blink of an eye the engine will be pushed off of the mounts and the drivetrain will be destroyed. Additionally, the back wheels are going to lose traction immediately. The vehicle is then being carried forward by whatever momentum it had at the start of the impact, until the crumple zones collapse and it eventually returns to a resting position.

You say that the car was only moving 35mph, which is clearly within the design envelope of the car for surviving a crash. But the other vehicle had a lot more mass and velocity heading in the opposite direction. That is why the crash was so devastating.
Triggerhappy is offline  
post #145 of 285 (permalink) Old 06-09-2013, 05:23 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
We can agree to disagree on Mercedes' legal claims. 3-facts they failed to address are: 1. If the airbags timely deployed then how did a driver sustain critical frontal injuries (broken rib cage, collapsed lung, lacerated liver & aortic), steering wheel reach the dashboard, and both front seat occupants sustain occipital scalp injuries? 2. How does Mercedes justify that the integrated seatbelt did not bend my seat back because the top outboard side where it connects is not bent without acknowledging the clearly deformed bottom outboard side? That is like claiming a straw does not bend when holding one end and pushing the other end., and 3. Given Newton's 2nd law of motion defining Force = mass x acceleration, how does this law not apply to a collision involving a Mercedes Benz?

I don't understand your judgment of acceleration v. velocity as "meaningless" and would like to steer clear of subjective discussion. I agree with you that there is a force-vector as a result of velocity at the point of impact or "instantaneous velocity". I do not agree that anybody can justify denying F=ma either (the force-vector as a result of acceleration). These are two forces that are added to each others to determine total force. You raise a great point about the vehicle crumpling and when the engine will no longer produce acceleration. In front of an engine lies a radiator support and bumper assembly that contains 2 of 3 decccelerometers (3rd is mounted to the firewall). I believe we agree on the fact that before any of these components reach the engine with enough force to cut its power off the engine is still producing power. Let's park your rear-tire traction point for a moment as that gets into dynamics involving Mercedes' very effective traction control system and if enough traction is lost to cut power before the engine loses power from damage. This matter is about objectively determining if a vehicle's own motive power is capable of crumpling the components in front of the point the engine's power is cut off by damage, without deccelerating enough for the front 2-airbag sensors to trigger deployment. If so, then we can understand that the front occupants would need to wait until the engine impacts the firewall with enough force to trigger the 3rd airbag sensor.

We don't know enough to judge if the stretch limousine was going any faster than 35mph. Anybody can look up Quaker Meeting House Road in Bethpage, NY on mapquest.com or Google Earth and see the merge from the Bethpage State Golfcourse exit road to the QMH-westbound lane to see that limo's approach road characteristics for themselves. Let's say 35mph. It still does not equate to a frontal barrier impact at 70mph with one vehicle (mythbusters covered that point). Sure it also doesn't equate to a frontal barrier impact at 35mph with one vehicle either. That is why the test being performed will be a partial frontal barrier test w/40% overlap. The full frontal barrier test at 30mph is not the only test required to prove the effectiveness of occupant restraint systems. And 40% overlap is still enough to damage the engine (I'm not trying to prolong power application). If the result is identical to a constant velocity same test, then Mercedes is right and I lose $40,000 at a very bad time. If the result is not, then Mercedes will be given the opportunity to pioneer the minor modifications it takes to address acceleration. If they still choose to deny it and badger my name and ability as an engineer while taking credit for my life, then I'll publish the results as I push for the necessary dictations in crash test requirements using Mercedes' claims as the example. I owned a Mercedes in 2006. I own one now for other reasons. I wouldn't want Mercedes letting it reach this rather disgraceful stage due to the negative affects it could potentially have to the value of a vehicle. Nor the negative affects it could potentially have to their market and employees. But that last part is just my personal opinion in the perspective of a businessman with the intention of serving the best interests of company supporters. Sure we can judge the two drivers for immediately bracing on accelerators, but that doesn't justify an airbag picking up your freshly mangled body by your face and throwing into the moonroof. A simple solution to this matter is the therapy I seek so nobody else ever experiences this unsurvivable event in any vehicle. Otherwise I have to live betting that this will never happen again, and I'll never learn of it before my time comes again. I hope you understand how a sole-survivor with first-hand experience just simply cannot live with that. Appreciate the time you took to express your objective perspectives (ie. instantaneous velocity & crumple zones/engine power cutoff) and any response you may have. Personally, I'd love close this chapter before the crash test occurs (as not to have to consider any 'leakage' of results) and enjoy the remaining life of my 2003 CL55 AMG as its only driver. Maybe I can live with that and finally move on with the rest of my life with the benefit of my name not being made anymore public or becoming 'that guy'. It's certainly not about pride nor 'trolling' for anything more than an ethically decent outcome. We'd all win in that scenario.

Last edited by virage105; 06-09-2013 at 05:47 PM.
virage105 is offline  
post #146 of 285 (permalink) Old 06-20-2013, 11:27 AM
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Feb 2007
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Virage,

When conducting your test, how will you measure, capture and show your results? Will the car be rigged with data recorders and cameras etc? What measures will you take to ensure Mercedes' lawyers don't look at your testing process and find something that it says discredits or undermines your findings? I guess I'm asking what needs to be done to ensure the process is in accordance with recognised and accepted testing procedures. Will there be an independent party present?

Second question. What result are you looking for in the crash data, or the car's deformation performance, in order for you to say 'see! see! said i was right!'?

Good luck with the test. I hope the outcome gives you the closure you need...whether it proves your theory right or wrong, at least you'll finally know.
Scudetto is offline  
post #147 of 285 (permalink) Old 06-20-2013, 07:31 PM
BenzWorld Member
 
MarcDavidMiller's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2008
Location: New York/Moscow
Posts: 99
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Post Of all the words written here, this is the prizewinner

Quote:
Originally Posted by virage105 View Post
...These lawyers and judges are the first series of Jewish folks I've ever had the opportunity to deal with and I wish just one would stand up and make a good example of themselves. It's as if it's not in the nature. I'm no biggot and never wish to be, I'm just calling is as I'm living it. ...

Having lived in New York most of my life, and having watched the film Gentlemen's Agreement, I can see anti-Semitic bigotry when it is laid out so clearly.

And "biggot" is correctly spelled "bigot."

On a personal level it is clear that you have undergone a tragic event. I prey that you are able to recover in every possible way, as you are troubled.

Last edited by MarcDavidMiller; 06-21-2013 at 08:49 AM.
MarcDavidMiller is offline  
post #148 of 285 (permalink) Old 06-24-2013, 04:54 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Scudetto - The test is being performed at a facility that has all the recording and crash sensory abilities used for standardized tests. This test will be a modified version of a standard test. I'm no longer concerned about what Mercedes' attorneys say (already learned their engineers & attorneys will say anything while paid given their denial of Newton's 2nd Law of Motion). I'm concerned with demonstrating my experience and seeing if MB will stand up and act, or carry on as they have but to the public next as I move to present this to the NHSTA and lawmakers if such a baby-sitting episode is necessary because of Mercedes' behavior example.

MarcDavidMiller - I grew up in Long Island and there's a difference between stating real experiences and stating a prejudice opinion about an entire culture based on experiences with a select few. You should have seen the Italians in Progressive denying a simple lost wage claim. It's no secret Italians founded the insurance industry and Jews have a strong presence in our legal system. Saying that doesn't mean I hate either. I do have a Jewish friend that stated a rather strong opinion about the disbarred attorney Weinreb after listening to him rant for a few minutes while trying to pick up company records being withheld. If I said his words it would be considered 'anti-Semitic'. A low-life is a low-life in any culture. A judge disqualifying my education as an engineer (sure you've heard of NYU-Poly) while I'm presenting text to address MB's denial of Newton's 2nd Law of Motion.....really? My opinion that it may have been a good idea to wait till the next round to find a reasonable excuse to make me go away does not make me a 'bigot'. Please don't take it personally. I'm not sure what you mean when you call me 'troubled'. May be troubled I've been placed in such a position beyond my control, but blessed I was able to see the problem, survive the plundering, survive MB's outrageous claims, and actually stand back up and address the root problem for others' benefit (as well as my own). I pray that MB will not let this go on for another minute. There are a lot of Jewish folks in Long Island with MB's and I don't want to be title'd a 'bigot' if something I expose negatively affects the value of their MB's. Now I'm only joking but that 1st part is still true. In life real things still occur that need to be addressed. It's not all a made-up stage. MB, the Weinrebs, that judge, Progressive, NY arbitration assoc., even my former 'brother' and the driver's wife will all contend with the truth of their choices. It's what happens when people wish to just walk away from their actions without any correction or accountability. I was very troubled while facing a dashboard analyzing how 516ftlbs of torque can affect accelerometers aimed in the opposing direction just before impact. And even more troubled knowing my good friend sitting next to me in the drivers seat will die wrongfully hoping an airbag will timely deploy. What's troubling is when the vehicle manufacturer has the gaul to claim their airbags timely deployed and saved my life after looking at photographs showing a steering wheel bent into a dashboard and my seatback bent at its hinge point. How an automobile company and their legal reps can deny Newton's 2nd law of motion upon their vehicles during a collision...that's 'troubled' considering such a lack of truth should result in a disbarment of the one presenting it. For the record, just because I'm speaking of a german-made vehicle does not mean I hate Germans either. Now I'm just messing with you. I don't wish to be the guy who has to do what I'm about to do, but I will.
virage105 is offline  
post #149 of 285 (permalink) Old 06-26-2013, 02:06 PM
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Feb 2007
Posts: 59
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks, Virage.

When is the test, and can you answer this question please:

What results are you looking for in the crash data, or the car's deformation performance, in order for you to prove you're right?
Scudetto is offline  
post #150 of 285 (permalink) Old 06-26-2013, 03:04 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Scudetto - Anytime and unfortunately I will not disclose the time or location of the test for my own protection. There may be a time I'm publishing a 2-3 stage video documentary even after the results are known/had. It's just the way it has to proceed so my apologies. Stephen Cannon, CEO of MBUSA, LLC has received a personal invitation and remains non-responsive. I will not accept the presence of any of their representatives or employees after my past experience with them and their outrageously false claims regarding the affects of acceleration on a collision.

My goal is to establish the link between a vehicle's own motive power, the performance of its front crumple zone and the ability of its airbag sensors to timely sense decceleration. So the ideal crash test result will show at least an unbelted driver's side test dummy impact the steering wheel before airbag deployment. The test will be a full-frontal since their are too many shearing and rotational dynamics associated with a partial frontal. It'll modify an FMVSS208 which is 30mph against a stationary solid barrier. Impact velocity will be increased to the 45-50mph range and a bumper material will be added to the barrier to better represent a head-on collision between 2-vehicles. Ideally I wanted a moving barrier to reduce the CL55's impact velocity (acceleration rates are higher at lower velocity). But that is not an easy test to perform with the vehicle's own motive max-power so a stationary barrier it will be. I just cannot believe the automobile industry has not addressed this and the vehicle manufacturers will let this be 'imposed' or 'dictated' to them in lieu of governing themselves. That's what bothers me the most about this situation. MB will try to claim they adhered with all federal safety standards but liability law clearly identifies that if the manufacturer could readily predict the issue and solve it, they are responsible. If an 'incompetent engineer' (in MB's own words) could predict this in one brief moment, and demonstrates it then it's safe to say MB will be out of excuses, but will still come up with more excuses nonetheless. It's not normal to deny Newton's 2nd Law of Motion (F=ma) and claim it doesn't apply to a MB. After all, what survivor would propose sitting in his CL55 for a constant velocity frontal barrier impact if the MBUSA CEO will sit in another CL55 for a maximum acceleration frontal barrier impact at matched velocities? If I were MB claiming acceleration has no affect whatsoever, I'd at least stand up and take that challenge in support of such a claim. But they know better. Any engineer knows acceleration creates a Force-vector that has undeniable affects. It's like jumping off a 10' ledge with an air-cannon aimed directly above you and claiming the air-cannon will have no affect on the landing, just gravity. That's the difference between ethical logic, and unethical claims. Realcompany.org - Dedicated to Simple Truth - Home will be used to publish the staged video documentaries of this event as it evolves into a formal database for both good and sour company experiences. MB did nothing but lunge and kick a man that their own vehicle injured way more than I would have been if an airbag timely deployed. Not to mention the experiences that follow a close-friend facing his death right next to you when either an airbag or him bracing as if there was no airbag would have been better for his survival over bracing for an airbag that smashed the top/back of his head against the roof. My only regret is not dropping everything in my life at the time and going straight to court. With $30m of self-founded projects and no idea on how I reached the dash so fast being 'sue-happy' was the last thing on my mind (took 2-years for me to realize and retrieve the case report which included photos of a failed passenger's seatback w/integrated belt). My attorney at the time, Alan Weinreb became involved in my projects but failed to bother retrieving a case report. His $200k payday would have came if I cleaned out the Driver's estate which I chose not to since he caused the collision, but was not to blame for a mal-designed airbag system-to-vehicle power. A former partner, Michael Weinreb, his brother and a disbarred attorney who once made up accident victim's injuries, was repeating my statements made to Progressive during company conference calls alongside a former brother. I don't think anyone can comprehend the years of logistics it takes to survive such an episode. It will be published in a book after the test. And MB will forever regret their choice to join in with a series of fraudulent cronies who gained nothing in the end, and also plunder a sole survivor with their outrageously false claims denouncing laws of physics as an automobile manufacturer and the one claiming to be the safest in the world. It really is the never-ending twilight zone that has hijacked any resemblance of my life (who wants to be close or who will I let become close when facing a Goliath throughout my 30's?). Stephen Cannon may soon become a landmark CEO who chose to do nothing about this beyond trusting the advice of his legal advisers who wouldn't take an action unless given a court order anyway. They accused me of making it all up based on the photos and my injuries when I lived it in full consciousness. Who does that? While calling me 'incompetent' no less? I'm drawing a line of decency/sick behavior and seeking to make such an example of MB, that any other company will think 10x's before going down a similar path against the existence of a sole survivor. If I were MB, I would have at least sat down with me and performed an in-house crash test or two. Anything but risk the value of every used MB's vehicle their supporters own, as well as the company's future over one survivor. That's the definition of Gaul.
virage105 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Closed Thread

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > MB Safety & Testimonials

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    Bluetooth & Integrated Phone Plug ProvingGrounds W140 S-Class 8 11-17-2013 10:21 AM
    COMMAND COMMUNICATION ISSUES & GATEWAY 500 WARRANTY ISSUES POURCTYSBKON Audio & Telematics Forum 2 12-26-2008 03:40 AM
    Great Deals on 209 AMG'S & 216'S CaliforniaMBGuy C209/A209 CLK-Class 2 09-06-2007 06:05 PM
    Integrated phone issues - seen this before? mkhoo W211 E-Class 1 12-11-2006 05:11 PM
    19" AMG's..anyone else have issues?? DKM C215 CL-Class 2 01-22-2003 12:08 AM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome