AMG's Airbag & Integrated Seatbelt Issues - Page 9 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #81 of 285 (permalink) Old 09-13-2011, 10:10 AM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
Date registered: Feb 2010
Vehicle: 1983 240D, 1974 240D
Location: RI
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by virage105 View Post
The bottom line is if a 2003 MB CL55 can pass a frontal barrier crash test at 30mph at maximum acceleration then I go away.

We can talk all day about the driver and my wordy statements but the bottom line is do you believe the airbags timely deployed during a linear head-on collision given the fact the driver sustained approx. 6-broken ribs, a collapsed lung, severed aortic and sliced liver before sustaining a rear-head injury; and the fact that the front seat passenger sustained numerous breaks to his left femur and forearm, a permanent nose injury and a laceration to the back of his head?

I was able to predict that the airbags will not timely deploy by a design fault. So either I'm fortunate enough to have wrongly predicted a design fault before a mechanical fault occurred, or there is a design fault. It all comes down to if it is possible for a vehicle's own power to crumple its metal without decelerating enough for airbag deployment. If I redemonstrate that MB does not meet FMVSS208 then you are correct, I'm the least of their problems. The only reason there isn't more of these incidences is simply due to the fact they are unsurvivable without functional airbags. And please don't use me as the living example they are survivable because I also died against that dashboard on June 11, 2006.
have you forgotten that the airbag is SUPPLEMENTARY?
definition: Something added to complete a thing, make up for a deficiency, or extend or strengthen the whole.

The seat belt is the primary restraint system, and should be capable of saving you even without the airbag. The air bag is a supplementary restraint system, and IS NOT designed to save you alone without the seat belt.

Ill tell you what the bottom line is, he wasn't wearing his seat belt, he lost control, and now hes dead. The function of the air bag is to ASSIST the seat belt, not save the life of someone foolish enough to ignore their primary restraint.

Chances are very good that the airbag INCREASED the amount of damage he received. Why? He wasn't wearing his seat belt.

If you think that you died that day, you just identified your primary problem, something that I would expect is poisoning you daily if all you can focus on is explaining away the clear driver error here and grasping at someone to blame. The truth is you lived, you need to move on, live the life that you still have. If my best friend killed himself, another of our friends, and maimed me, I wouldn't be spending this much time and energy defending his memory and convincing myself of other unlikely theories. Time to face reality, not delude yourself further.

1983 240D 4-speed, DD
1974 240D turbo 617 swap, W201 5-speed project
Abomination Chevy Astro, 616 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff. Work van
JBG3 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #82 of 285 (permalink) Old 09-13-2011, 10:50 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Your response fails to acknowledge the fact that I'm addressing what I experienced in the front passenger seat (WITH my seatbelt on). Strange picture you have of me believing I'm doing ALL this just to clear my dead friend's name....who has NOTHING to do wtih the performance of MB's safety systems (or lack thereof).

In the US, an airbag has to meet performance standards even WITHOUT the seatbelt. I had no idea myself. It's why I did nothing for the first 2-years since I convinced myself I had to have inadvertently slid out of the seatbelt while raising my left gaurd. Couldn't fathom the failed seatback until I saw those case photographs showing my seat bent forward by 30-40 degrees with a failure point directly beneath the integrated belt connection. So the airbag is MORE than 'supplemental' in the US. But that only applies to the dead driver.

It's funny how you think "dying" is something to think or believe. Hopefully you NEVER find out what that's like. Far from 'poison' though. If you knew something was designed faulty and will continue to take lives, would you do nothing about it? Do you consider doing nothing, moving on with your life? Like watching logic devolve.
virage105 is offline  
post #83 of 285 (permalink) Old 09-13-2011, 11:12 AM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
Date registered: Feb 2010
Vehicle: 1983 240D, 1974 240D
Location: RI
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by virage105 View Post
Your response fails to acknowledge the fact that I'm addressing what I experienced in the front passenger seat (WITH my seatbelt on). Strange picture you have of me believing I'm doing ALL this just to clear my dead friend's name....who has NOTHING to do wtih the performance of MB's safety systems (or lack thereof).

In the US, an airbag has to meet performance standards even WITHOUT the seatbelt. I had no idea myself. It's why I did nothing for the first 2-years since I convinced myself I had to have inadvertently slid out of the seatbelt while raising my left gaurd. Couldn't fathom the failed seatback until I saw those case photographs showing my seat bent forward by 30-40 degrees with a failure point directly beneath the integrated belt connection. So the airbag is MORE than 'supplemental' in the US. But that only applies to the dead driver.

It's funny how you think "dying" is something to think or believe. Hopefully you NEVER find out what that's like. Far from 'poison' though. If you knew something was designed faulty and will continue to take lives, would you do nothing about it? Do you consider doing nothing, moving on with your life? Like watching logic devolve.

did you not just say this?
the fact the driver sustained approx. 6-broken ribs, a collapsed lung, severed aortic and sliced liver before sustaining a rear-head injury

I thought you were directly addressing damage to the driver in your other comment. I don't think you are doing this wholly to protect your dead friend, but I do find it interesting that you can completely dismiss a very compelling chain of evidence that points to him being at fault for the accident in the first place, and instead blame it completely on a totally unverifiable torque lunge and the fact that you believe him to be a superior driver who could never lose control.
Comes off as a reach to me. Indicates to me that you want ALL factors of the accident to be the fault of MB, even though he looks very guilty with the information you have posted. Thats just my interpretation of what you have posted, and especially how defensively you react when called on it.
If you wan't my honest opinion, I think you are doing this all to make money. But thats just me.

In the US, an airbag has to meet performance standards even WITHOUT the seatbelt.

True, but of course, ALL elements of a vehicle have to meet performance standards individually, so whats your point? Do you have any evidence that these standards are supposed to guarantee life WITHOUT the seat belt? or are the standards supposed to guarantee the proper function of the airbag within the parameters set forth as part of the full restraint system on the vehicle? I don't know, if you have data that says specifically, would be interesting to read, but I know what seems more likely to me.

Personally, I don't blame the ABS system for not working if I don't use the brake pedal, which is like trying to identify a problem with the airbag when you are not wearing a seat belt.

this I find interesting-
It's funny how you think "dying" is something to think or believe.

did you not JUST post this?
And please don't use me as the living example they are survivable because I also died against that dashboard on June 11, 2006.

So are you saying now that you DON'T think dying is something to think or believe? because that is exactly what you posted when you proclaim that you died that day. Did you read what I wrote? I said "if you think" based on what YOU wrote. If you can't be consistent within 2 posts, how can anyone take all your personal testimony seriously?
One post you deliver a dramatic "I died that day", the next apparently you didn't, and its funny how "I" think that responding to what you wrote. This is a very confusing tactic, that unfortunately is not very effective. Just means that a jury would have more trouble taking most of your statements seriously. Try not to contradict yourself, at least not immediately in following statements.

1983 240D 4-speed, DD
1974 240D turbo 617 swap, W201 5-speed project
Abomination Chevy Astro, 616 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff. Work van

Last edited by JBG3; 09-13-2011 at 11:16 AM.
JBG3 is offline  
post #84 of 285 (permalink) Old 09-13-2011, 01:34 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
"I think you are doing this all to make money"
So you believe a front seat passenger that experiences a failed seatback and delayed airbag deployment during a tragic head-on collision sustains no hardships? Did someone convince you that I'm superman?

"Do you have any evidence that these standards are supposed to guarantee life WITHOUT the seat belt?"
I don't need that evidence. My seatbelt was on. You mentioned the driver should be dead for not wearing his seatbelt. That's wrong. During the crash test the test figure in the driver's seat won't have a seatbelt, and the one in the passenger's seat will to record how both seatbacks will perform.

"Personally, I don't blame the ABS system for not working if I don't use the brake pedal, which is like trying to identify a problem with the airbag when you are not wearing a seat belt."
Would you blame the ABS if it applied throttle instead of the brake? Was the airbag supposed to blow me BACKWARDS causing damage to the back/top of my head against the moonroof while WEARING a seatbelt? Was the seatback supposed to fail because I was WEARING a seatbelt? It's difficult to understand why you still insist on claiming I wasn't wearing a belt.

"So are you saying now that you DON'T think dying is something to think or believe? because that is exactly what you posted when you proclaim that you died that day. Did you read what I wrote? I said "if you think" based on what YOU wrote. If you can't be consistent within 2 posts, how can anyone take all your personal testimony seriously?"
The point was when you die, you don't think or believe it, you KNOW it cause you LIVED it. Nothing inconsistent about my statements. There never will be. You'll understand how foolish "thinking" or "believing" sounds when you experience death. Hopefully you don't experience the misfortune of actually having to return (like going from a nice house, to a sprawling mansion, then back to a public toilet!). If it was something I "thought" or "believed" vs. seen and experienced, I'd stop thinking or believing it in a heartbeat. Again, you'll never be able to understand death, until you experience it firsthand so let's not discuss it anymore. If you have someone that lived thru their own death and returned, I'd be able to communicate with them as there are very specific details that nobody else will "believe". And you cannot fathom the burden I committed myself to justify my return while pushing myself back. That's the worst hardship and I'll never see a single dollar over that one (yet it'll cost me for a lifetime in launching projects I never intended to).

My only issue is the fact that I was able to predict the airbags but could not fathom the seatback. If I were all about suing don't you believe I would have addressed the airbags right away? No, rather I had to understand that the seatbelt wasn't my fault to address both simultaneously (once I got my hands on the case report with photos depicting the failed seatback).

You've called me a liar, accused me of being in it for just the money, claimed I wasn't in my seatbelt, etc. And then accuse me for responding defensively....who's being "inconsistent" here? If we cannot achieve simple reasoning/logic we should cease this dialogue. So far you choose to disregard the fact I was belted, the fact that I reached the dash to sustain my injuries, and the fact that I have a rear head injury (as well as the driver). So unless you believe the rear seat passenger was able to damage the back/tops of both our heads, the outboard bottom side of my seatback, and impose all the critical frontal bodily injuries to both front seat occupants before his skull was fractured against the center of the dashboard, I'd love to hear your depiction of how the airbags and my seatbelt functioned properly. But I'm just the type of guy that believes an ABS system should at least be capable of applying the brakes, and not the complete opposite.

Last edited by virage105; 09-13-2011 at 02:16 PM.
virage105 is offline  
post #85 of 285 (permalink) Old 09-13-2011, 02:46 PM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
Date registered: Feb 2010
Vehicle: 1983 240D, 1974 240D
Location: RI
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So you believe a front seat passenger that experiences a failed seatback and delayed airbag deployment during a tragic head-on collision sustains no hardships? Did someone convince you that I'm superman?

You said it, not me. Sounds like a perfect reason to attempt to get money out of MB as far as im concerned. So are you agreeing with me in that your ultimate goal is to milk this international corporation for cash in order to ease your hardships? If it makes you feel better, im perfectly willing to believe that you BELIEVE everything you say is true. However, you have come nowhere near close to proving that, which is a shame. Also your continual posts about being screwed by your brother and business partner paint a very vivid picture as far as motive for you.
Do I believe that you have suffered hardships? certainly.

I don't need that evidence. My seatbelt was on. You mentioned the driver should be dead for not wearing his seatbelt. That's wrong. During the crash test the test figure in the driver's seat won't have a seatbelt, and the one in the passenger's seat will to record how both seatbacks will perform.

And this proves exactly what? How do you intend to make a case against both the seat back and airbags at the same time with one car and make that stick as representative evidence? I didn't say he should be dead for not wearing his seatbelt, I said he IS dead for not wearing his seat belt. You seem to believe that he didn't need to wear a seat belt at all, that he should have lived without it regardless except for a fault with the airbag deployment, right? I think thats ridiculous, and the fact that hes dead and you are alive when you wore your seat belt support me. Im not sure how you intend to conclusively prove this by just throwing an unbelted dummy in the driver's seat.
If the dummy gets trashed as it probably will, all MB has to say is it wasn't wearing a seatbelt. I just don't understand how you think this will turn into magic evidence that creates an entire case for you for both the seatback and airbag claims.



Would you blame the ABS if it applied throttle instead of the brake? Was the airbag supposed to blow me BACKWARDS causing damage to the back/top of my head against the moonroof while WEARING a seatbelt? Was the seatback supposed to fail because I was WEARING a seatbelt? It's difficult to understand why you still insist on claiming I wasn't wearing a belt.


At no time have I EVER made the statement that you weren't wearing a belt. In fact, my entire argument to date has been around you surviving BECAUSE you were wearing a belt. Yeah, you got messed up, welcome to the reality of high speed collisions. Frankly, id be surprised if you HADN'T incurred additional damage based on the wreck pictures, which are very severe.
Im not sure how you arrived on my claiming you weren't wearing a belt, if you have that much trouble accurately reading what other's have written, how can we trust this miraculous retelling of events 5 years ago that you expect everyone to take at face value?





You've called me a liar, accused me of being in it for just the money, claimed I wasn't in my seatbelt, etc. And then accuse me for responding defensively....who's being "inconsistent" here? If we cannot achieve simple reasoning/logic we should cease this dialogue. So far you choose to disregard the fact I was belted, the fact that I reached the dash to sustain my injuries, and the fact that I have a rear head injury (as well as the driver). So unless you believe the rear seat passenger was able to damage the back/tops of both our heads, the outboard bottom side of my seatback, and impose all the critical frontal bodily injuries to both front seat occupants before his skull was fractured against the center of the dashboard, I'd love to hear your depiction of how the airbags and my seatbelt functioned properly. But I'm just the type of guy that believes an ABS system should at least be capable of applying the brakes, and not the complete opposite.[/QUOTE]


Again, what? Where have I ever said you weren't wearing a seat belt? If i were you, id welcome a little free wheeling debate about your "case" with a bunch of strangers for the purposes of practice. If talking to me makes you this upset, you are going to snap like a twig in front of a lawyer cross examining you!

How does calling you a liar, claiming you are in it for the money, and calling you defensive sound inconsistent to you? All three dovetail nicely in my opinion. Honestly, I don't think you are lying, I simply think that your interpretation of events and conclusions about how things happened does not agree with the facts you have posted on this thread. Its as simple as that.

I don't buy the whole 3 separate issues with the same vehicle line. I don't buy that there wasn't driver error, and i ESPECIALLY don't buy that you consistently create circumstantial evidence out of two passengers in the front, one belted, one unbelted, and believe that their injuries should represent some kind of trend towards an airbag fault when how their bodies reacted in the accident is completely different! down to the size and shape of the airbag, the proximity of the dash, the position of the seats, and especially the lack of a belt on the driver!

I do like how you have somehow decided that I "claimed" you weren't belted in! You need to read through the thread again and refresh yourself instead of getting confused.

1983 240D 4-speed, DD
1974 240D turbo 617 swap, W201 5-speed project
Abomination Chevy Astro, 616 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff. Work van
JBG3 is offline  
post #86 of 285 (permalink) Old 09-13-2011, 05:44 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
So if an international corporation has a faulty design that kills people and one person lives and attempts to do something about it, that person is "milking" them? Please don't ask me such foolish questions. It's wasting minutes of lives that'll never be retrieved. Do you believe it is the driver's fault that MB's airbag and seatbacks failed to operate?

If a crash test is performed and its demonstrated that MB does not adhere to FMVSS208 at maximum acceleration, do you believe there will be a case? I can only suggest you research FMVSS208 to learn about test expectations for unbelted occupants.

"Personally, I don't blame the ABS system for not working if I don't use the brake pedal, which is like trying to identify a problem with the airbag when you are not wearing a seat belt."
So you're talking about the driver when you say "you"? Please double check your grammer before accusing me of being "inaccurate". I don't wish for anybody to trust my words. The frontal barrier crash test will tell all.

"Yeah, you got messed up, welcome to the reality of high speed collisions."
Still claiming this is a "high speed collision" too I see. Are you aware of the difference between speed and acceleration? Can you explain how a vehicle can travel at high speed thru a hairpin uphill turn without loosing control until after the turn? There is a detective's deposition noting how odd it was that he observed absolutely no asphalt gouging typical with head-on impacts. High speed = high rate of deceleration and nosing down. Low speed w/high acceleration = low rate of deceleration and nosing up. If you cannot understand the difference between acceleration and velocity then ask yourself if you'd rather be in a Yugo or a SL65 Black Series car if hitting a wall at maximum acceleration. MB claimed there will be no difference in the outcome. Do you believe that?

"..and believe that their injuries should represent some kind of trend towards an airbag fault when how their bodies reacted in the accident is completely different! down to the size and shape of the airbag, the proximity of the dash, the position of the seats, and especially the lack of a belt on the driver!"
Do you believe a layperson is not capable of acknowledging the fact that airbags are not intended to impose REAR HEAD INJURIES as a result of a linear head-on collision?

I'm not here to prove a case to anyone. I'm here to warn MB owners that their high powered conversion models (from former 300hp sedans) do not scale up occupant restraint systems accordingly. Do you believe an international corporation has no responsibility to consider the force of acceleration when doubling or trippling a base model's power? Do you believe I (as the front seat passenger) should have known when entering the vehicle that MB's airbags will untimely deploy after a head-on collision? A friend recently experienced a head-on with NO seatbelt from the other vehicle traveling at over 65mph into him. He thought he was going to die. Yet a timely airbag deployment allowed him to walk away. Clearly airbags HELP even when seatbelts aren't used. Sure we all grew up being taught they work together, but the fact is there are safety standards to address airbag performance even without a seatbelt. The driver died not because he wasn't wearing his seatbelt as you claim but rather because the airbag never timely deployed! The steering wheel is half-way the distance between me and the MB dash. If I sustained injuries against the dash WITH A BELT ON, do you believe a belt would have prevented the driver from reaching the steering wheel?

When you wish to answer questions v. talking at me with assumptions, I look forward to your reply.

Last edited by virage105; 09-13-2011 at 05:48 PM.
virage105 is offline  
post #87 of 285 (permalink) Old 09-13-2011, 10:56 PM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
6.2AMG's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jul 2010
Vehicle: 2009 E63
Posts: 557
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I didn't read the entire thread. There seems to be too much emotional stuff tied into what happened to show a truly objective side to this. That's what the lawyers will do (try to be objective.) Plus there are always other bits and pieces that usually need to be told but are being withheld (like all the ancillary personal stuff.) We're only hearing one side of the story and it's being told in a particular way to gain support. But that's understandable as the OP's agenda is to convince the reader that his theory is indeed a correct one.

But I'm curious: haven't there been other crashes in a CL55 or a CL65 before? What were the outcomes? Daimler will have the data on them. Are people dying specifically in CL models? The turbo charged 6.0 liter V12 of the CL65 has almost twice the torque.

And this seems somewhat perplexing to me: "I'm here to warn MB owners that their high powered conversion models (from former 300hp sedans) do not scale up occupant restraint systems accordingly. Do you believe an international corporation has no responsibility to consider the force of acceleration when doubling or trippling [sic] a base model's power?"

There are many other cars with superior torque and power to the CL55. Are they all "beefed-up" structurally compared to their counterparts? If they are, that would be interesting to note.

But given that there are laws governing speed limits, isn't this primarily the responsibility of the driver? Isn't the track the only realistic place to be driving fast? And on the track you waive all liability. We don't have the Autobahn here, but even on the Autobahn you can drive a Skoda at 100+ mph and get killed. Or even at 50 mph. Or a Bentley. After all, any car can potentially kill you whether it's moving at 30 mph or 150 mph.

It's kind of like the "professional driver, do not attempt on public streets" warnings that go with all the ads for performance cars (and even regular cars.) And there are many other brands for sale that have much more power than a CL55. Again, are they all specifically better equipped for a high speed accident? Is the new BMW F10 M5 going to be different safety-wise than the lower performing F10 535i? Or should we be regulating for roll cages, four point belts, and a HANS device and helmet for all performance street production cars?

Can you die just as easily in a CL550? Or is it because the CL55 has more power that entices people to take more risks on public roads? And who's fault is that? The manufacturer or the owner?

It does raise a lot of philosophical questions of personal responsibility and corporate liability.
6.2AMG is offline  
post #88 of 285 (permalink) Old 09-14-2011, 07:23 AM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
Date registered: Feb 2010
Vehicle: 1983 240D, 1974 240D
Location: RI
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So you're talking about the driver when you say "you"? Please double check your grammer before accusing me of being "inaccurate". I don't wish for anybody to trust my words. The frontal barrier crash test will tell all.

Reduced to attacking grammar to determine inconsistency? Does that seriously help your case? Another tactic that will not help you in court, add that to condescending to a jury, and complaining about your personal financial losses. These are strategies that will CERTAINLY endear you to a jury of your peers.

Heres an inconsistency that would be nice if you would address. You are accusing MB of improperly designing their high powered vehicles to withstand severe crashes as a result of that higher power.

For instance, you say here-
I'm here to warn MB owners that their high powered conversion models (from former 300hp sedans) do not scale up occupant restraint systems accordingly. Do you believe an international corporation has no responsibility to consider the force of acceleration when doubling or trippling a base model's power?

then you say here-
Still claiming this is a "high speed collision" too I see. Are you aware of the difference between speed and acceleration? Can you explain how a vehicle can travel at high speed thru a hairpin uphill turn without loosing control until after the turn? There is a detective's deposition noting how odd it was that he observed absolutely no asphalt gouging typical with head-on impacts. High speed = high rate of deceleration and nosing down. Low speed w/high acceleration = low rate of deceleration and nosing up.

My question then is, if this is a low speed collision, how can you accuse them of not designing properly for high speed situations when that is not what you say happened here? How do the two relate? How do you intend to prove a high speed safety flaw in a low speed crash? How can you say these items are not safe for high HP and high speed, when you also say the crash happened at low speed? These are speeds attainable by any normal car, in fact you place the limo at nearly twice the speed of the MB! High speed and high power according to you have nothing to do with the actual accident, but you are also attacking safety features based on poor design for that premise.
It seems that your argument is that the safety items needed to be scaled up for high acceleration, right? But how will you prove this without really knowing what the speeds were, or the specifics of how the accident actually played out? Even if you actually know every single thing that went on in the MB, that still leaves the other car.

That brings back into question as to how you arrived at the vehicle speeds. In post 3, you state-

We were traveling approx. 25mph upon an automatic downshift exiting a last curve that woke me up (second 1), then a brief recovery attempt off throttle (second 2), then the limo merging into his lane at speed (approx. 45mph - Second 3) then both drivers braced on the accelerators for impact (witnesses heard no skidding - Seconds 4 and 5).

1. Im sorry, but you can have absolutely no idea of how fast the limo was going. Thats a completely ridiculous assumption to make. You simply don't know, and there is no way you can know.

2. You state that the MB was travelling at 25. From the pics, that looks like a pretty well paved, well banked curve to me. I routinely take curves like that around here in my work van at 40+, so I find it less likely that the MB was moving so slowly, especially if he had just passed someone 1/4 earlier. Do you have a pic of the curve facing the opposite direction?

3. Somehow, in your mind, the absence of skids means both drivers braced on the accelerator. This is also completely unbelievable. A lack of a negative does not prove a positive. This could more likely mean that both cars never saw the other, not uncommon on curves.

The scenario I see is that he MB was speeding, came around the curve accelerating out of it, ended up in the oncoming lane, was trying to correct, and ran head on into a limo coming the opposite direction, likely having never seen it in time.

1983 240D 4-speed, DD
1974 240D turbo 617 swap, W201 5-speed project
Abomination Chevy Astro, 616 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff. Work van

Last edited by JBG3; 09-14-2011 at 07:47 AM.
JBG3 is offline  
post #89 of 285 (permalink) Old 09-14-2011, 07:35 AM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
Date registered: Feb 2010
Vehicle: 1983 240D, 1974 240D
Location: RI
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6.2AMG View Post

But I'm curious: haven't there been other crashes in a CL55 or a CL65 before? What were the outcomes? Daimler will have the data on them. Are people dying specifically in CL models? The turbo charged 6.0 liter V12 of the CL65 has almost twice the torque.
Thats a question I have too. In this single crash, there are three separate charges against MB.

1. a torque lunge issue, supposedly the cause of the accident
2. improper seat back design
3. improper air bag deployment

Thats a LOT of issues for a single car that is very popular and owned by thousands of people, yet I don't see any other examples of this in other accidents. Instead of posting irrelevant emotional passages, example here-

Again, you'll never be able to understand death, until you experience it firsthand so let's not discuss it anymore. If you have someone that lived thru their own death and returned, I'd be able to communicate with them as there are very specific details that nobody else will "believe". And you cannot fathom the burden I committed myself to justify my return while pushing myself back.

The OP should be posting research he's done on other accidents involving the same car. Lets see more evidence that this is a common problem, otherwise its one car, one crash test, and one questionable personal statement.

1983 240D 4-speed, DD
1974 240D turbo 617 swap, W201 5-speed project
Abomination Chevy Astro, 616 turbo swap, T5 5-speed, 4.56 diff. Work van
JBG3 is offline  
post #90 of 285 (permalink) Old 09-14-2011, 08:08 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Jun 2010
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
They were your words, NOT mine. If you are accusing me of reading YOUR words, then I'm guilty of basic comprehension. Again, if this crash test re-demonstrates what I lived thru, it'll be published before it ever reaches a jury.

"My question then is, if this is a low speed collision, how can you accuse them of not designing properly for high speed situations when that is not what you say happened here? How do the two relate? How can you say these items are not safe for high HP and high speed, when you also say the crash happened at low speed?"
You continue to mix up the meaning of "speed" v. "acceleration". I NEVER said MB is not designing properly for high speed situations (that's just absurd, as you stated any vehicle can speed). Acceleration is the RATE at which speed increases. Deceleration is the complete opposite. Airbags are deployed by accelerometers measuring acceleration in reverse. When a vehicle manufacturer chooses to vastlly increase the vehicle's acceleration, they have an obligation to consider a negative affect on the occupant restraint systems. Especially when airbags are dependant upon sensors monitoring acceleration in the opposite direction. If this was about speed and not acceleration, those airbags would have timely deployed.

"1. Im sorry, but you can have absolutely no idea of how fast the limo was going. Thats a completely ridiculous assumption to make. You simply don't know, and there is no way you can know."
The limo just merged onto the road immediately before the impact. A stretch limo could not take that 90-degree slightly transitioned merge at over approx. 45mph without loosing control. I watched his approach. His headlights weren't even keeled over.

"2. You state that the MB was travelling at 25. From the pics, that looks like a pretty well paved, well banked curve to me. I routinely take curves like that around here in my work van at 40+, so I find it less likely that the MB was moving so slowly, especially if he had just passed someone 1/4 earlier. Do you have a pic of the curve facing the opposite direction?"
I'd love to video you taking that curve in your work van at 40+mph. And I wish we were traveling faster than 25-30mph thru that curve. See, the rate of increase in speed (acceleration) is exponentially higher at lower speeds. If we were traveling faster, the lunge affect upon the automatic downshift wouldn't have been so violent. He would have drove faster, but he knew I was sleeping. Awoke cause the car he passed 2-curves earlier was traveling too slow (in depositions, that driver even speaks of his ultra slow driving habits). Once passed I was dozing back off before that last curve before being awoken by the torque lunge.

"3. Somehow, in your mind, the absence of skids means both drivers braced on the accelerator. This is also completely unbelievable. A lack of a negative does not prove a positive. This could more likely mean that both cars never saw the other, not uncommon on curves."
In my mind, the absence of watching the limo lights not nose down at all, and the unforgetable downshift and re-lunge of the MB immediately prior to impact means both drivers braced on the accelerators. The lack of skid marks and ANY asphalt gouging only confirms that fact. The impact area is clear of any sharp curves. But the limo just merged onto the roadway so both drivers had just enough time to brace outward, unfortunately without enough time to move their foots over to the brakes.

The scenario you paint would have produced skid marks thru the curve which did not exist. A high speed head-on collision would have produced asphalt gouging beneath the impact area (from a nosing down affect of deceleration) which also did not exist. Again, I WISH he was traveling at a higher rate of speed, but all he did was lean on it while exiting a curve. I would have done the same thing in his shoes, but I would never let that automatic transmission downshift on power (it's a neutral drop at 25mph). In fact, before the crash test a series of acceleration tests will be performed to determine if an automatic downshift at a fixed velocity of approx. 25mph is capable of producing greater acceleration at 30mph v. accelerating from a stop. I believe it will since pre-spooled power is always greater than applied power but the tests will tell the truth. The crash test will the proceed at the greater acceleration method.

So how exactly am I "milking" MB? My nipples feel quite sore right now. Actually the back of my head, my arm with two U-channels of metal still stuck inside it (prob. for life now), and my leg for a titanium rod still stuck inside it (also prob. for life now). One person was able to predict in 1-2 seconds that the airbags will not timely deploy under such massive acceleration. Why weren't over 250,000 employees of an international corporation capable of acknowledging the same given over a decade? Why did I have to watch someone brace for an airbag knowing he just made the deadliest choice of his life, and paid the ultimate price for it? You still haven't explained your scenario of how we both have rear head injuries with a series of critical frontal bodily injuries if the airbags timely deployed.

Last edited by virage105; 09-14-2011 at 08:13 AM.
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