Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

Safety begins with the w126

9K views 22 replies 18 participants last post by  brianengle 
#1 ·
I feel the w126 is the starting point of mercedes-benz safety. With the srs and airbags, w126 truly kept safety in mind especially for its year. Look at past benzes, so safety what so ever! I bring this topic up because i have recently found out my very close family friend died in a car accident. She was driving a 1976 sl. I recall riding in this car, it is benz, but not really the safest benz. I feel it is a two door hunk of metal with no safety in mind. I know if she was driving a different car that she would have walked away. We are lucky to be driving such a big safe car. Drive Safe everyone. R.I.P Candy, I will always remember you.
 
#2 ·
Actually, mercedes has always had an eye on safety, as it was the most guaranteed way of repeat business (totaled car, unhurt passengers and driver=new mercedes purchase). It's just that even though they have been a little ahead of the game, they are only as good as the era allowed.

For example, they advertise that they invented: crumple zones, traction control, ABS, seatbelts, and rollover tests.

my condolences.

eddie
 
#3 ·
I agree with Eddie -- Mercedes has always been a very thoughtfully engineered car, and safety has been one of the engineering points for a very long time. But of course no Benz could have ABS or airbags before those items were invented. You'd be amazed at how much R+D money Benz spends on gathering data on driver comfort and performance, and the various subtle ways the engineers try to maximize safe driving.

That having been said, small two-seat sports cars will always be less than completely safe, given the laws of physics and this era of SUVs we're living in. I am very sorry for your loss.
 
#4 ·
You are unfortunately miscontruing safety and gadjets. How much better do you think airbags and ABS make a geo metro or a Ka? So many Toyota/Honda owners praise their quadruple five star offset frontal ratings. Baloney, run a new Accord or Camry head on into a 1970 Deville. I'll take the Deville any day, you can go to the morgue. What you should appreciate is how strong the passenger compartment on a w116 or w126 really is and that it IS a big car- physics is so important when unlike cars meet. Head on between the Accord and Deville at the same speed will actually accelerate the Accord BACKWARD!!! On the w116 the passenger compartment is strong and the engine compartment and trunk weak so that the crash is dealt with and you walk away. The problem with the SL is not that it isn't designed the same but that it is simply smaller, although people have been killed in any size car even a w126. Take a look at the gov crash data. What should shock you is when a moderate and survivable crash deforms the passenger area of the car. Once that happens it's bad news. On better European cars even the drivetrain is designed **NOT** to drive backward in a crash thru the dashboard (brings to mind 1970's Toyotas) but instead dive down under the car. Some yuppie nit-wit in a volvo had a wreck on a highway near here and exclaimed "the force of the crash was so great it knocked the engine out of the car". It's SUPPOSED to do that! (that's why he's still talking about it). But of course strong cars are good up to an extent, once crash forces get large enough no matter how good the car or your airbag is your internal organs will tear apart - which is especially true with the Accord being pushed backward. oh and another thing - I'll gladly take a German behind the wheel without ABS versus an American with ABS.
 
#8 ·
Well let me tell you; I am alive because of it was a Benz that I got in an accident with back in 95 rather than some other brand.
I was on the island of Cyprus in a taxi (which happens to be Benz) on my way to the airport to leave for Paris. Customarly the seat of choice there is the front passenger one. So I sat there and fell asleep as it was way before my usual coffe time. sometime later I woke up to glance at the instrument cluster and the dude was trying to reach a record or something. That's when I really worke up and looked outside as a sign indicating an approaching round about that flew by. Within a second the driver lost control and I braced myself for impact knowing that I made the biggest mistake of my life; I was not wearing the seat belt.
From this point everything went in slow motion, the car hitting the curve and jumping into the median directly heading towards a lamp post. That must have been one of the largests lamp post I have ever seen. It was like we were a magnet to that post, sure enough we hit at and I saw that thing fall on us and its cement base fly out off the ground. As all this was going on I took off from my seat towards the windshield. Luckely my elbows stoped my unplanned flight by hitting the dashboard. I was seated back like a good boy gasping for air as the wind got knocked out off me. As soon as the car came to a stop with a huge post laying right smack the middle of it an arm reached into the cabin and pulled me right from the window. I am not kidding this dude yanked me of the car as if I was a rag doll. I was so lucky that dude happened to be a British soldier that was with other soldiers in a truck that witnessed the whole show. I think he had to pull me fast as the car was seeping gasoline everywhere and there was no time to see what would happen next. I laid on the grass of that median still trying to get my breath, once I was functional I hurried to look for the taxi driver. He was safe as well with just some knee pain from the steering wheel.
I tell you, if that was some rental that I would have used to go ack to the airport and I made the same mistake, I would not be here. That Benz was mess, but the cabin was intact and the roof held.
I don't remember what class that car was but I do remember that it was a 300 series. It did not matter after that, I was convinced now why my old man loves them Benzes, except he likes the stinky kind that spew diesel all over, oh well, I got a nicer now.
 
#10 ·
Sorry for your loss...

Quite honestly guys, I have been to many salvage yards with many Benz wrecks. I have NEVER seen a W126 with its safety cage collapsed even a little or anything. I have seen several R129's crushed, a few W140, some W124's, a lot of W210's crumpled, 201's, 202's, whatever you name it. I think the W116 was similarly stiff too, but it was before my time. When they nickname these cars tanks they really are.[:D] Just slam the door in one, but make sure your fingers are outside the doorjamb.[xx(] From someone who knows.(rolls eyes)
 
#11 ·
...on the other hand, there *is* something to be said for ABS. on my way home from work today on the highway, there was a 3-car pileup in the fast lane right in front of my eyes. my 560's ABS helped keep me from making that a 4-car pileup...
 
#12 ·
I found a picture that sums up just how stiff these cars are click here http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Flats/2188/Gallery.htm



and scroll down half way ,can't miss it [:0]

btw sorry to here of you're loss
 
#13 ·
The loss of your friend’s life is tragic and there is no excuse or mitigating circumstance that can justify the loss of life in a motor accident – I’m sorry for your loss; I don’t know, however, about the r107 being a “hunk of metal with no safety in mind� but, yes, I would agree that the roadsters are not the safest cars MB made – then again they were not intended to be. The r107 is a strong and sturdy car reflecting DB’s quality of the era, the roadster design, however, places a limit on comprehensive safety features. The sedans and coupes are safer because they do not have the same design restrictions.
 
#14 ·
NC Rick - 2/27/2004 8:38 PM

They pioneered research into the structural strength in seats and support. In the event of being rear-ended this can make a huge difference in the safety of the occupant.
Mercedes also pioneered the seat belt pretensioner.
 
#15 ·
jzaroh - 2/27/2004 10:25 PM

I have NEVER seen a W126 with its safety cage collapsed even a little or anything.
Unfortunately I have. I saw a 560 SEL (this is true of ALL the long wheelbase 126s btw) that was in a roll over accident. The passenger side C pillar collapsed. The occupant in the passenger side rear seat would have had his/her head crushed. On the plus side: roll over crashes are fairly rare – I believe this one happened at high speed – and the driver’s area of the cage was intact. I don’t consider this to be a “failure’ or “weakness� of the car. The roof of a 126 SEL is very strong – it’s just that it’s also VERY LONG and is going to give when enough force is placed upon it – I’m sure a lesser car would have suffered a complete roof collapse and everyone would have perished.
 
#18 ·
BTW, FYI - the airbag was invented in 1974 and was sold aftermarket by companies to fit in Detroit iron back in the 70s. So in a sense it took MB a while to get that technology into their cars.

Besides, I prefer the dual airbags in your avatar!
 
#19 ·
I've had 5 people in mine at 120 mph. No sweat.

As for crumple zones:

I think a lot of people are missing the point. When we see a car that was in a huge accident, and it has small amounts of damage, there must be something wrong. When a vehicule crashes, what ever the scenario, big into small, big into big, a transfer of energy occurs. The energy of velocity is converted into sound, heat, and other forces. If there is minimal damage to the vehicule, the transfer of energy passed throughout the vehicule. Now this is no good, as humans are not designed to absorb this.
The human body can only handle about 60 g's for brief periods (milli seconds) before internal damage occurs. Big accidents are a lot more. To sum this up, there are three collisions that actually occur in a car accident.

1. Vehicule hits object (car)
2. Human absorbs impact
3. Organs absorb impact

So all those old tanks, and cadillacs are not necessarily tha safest cars. You want crumple zones (to absorb the impact) with minimal intrusion into the passenger compartment. I think the W126 clearly demonstrates this. The passenger compartment is extremely rigid, yet the front, and back sections are designed to crumple to aborb as much of the energy of impact as possible.
 
#21 ·
Looking back at one of the Posts commenting on the Safety of the new Accord. I wouldn't write that car off too quickly as it seems to get 5 Star Ratings all around the board, with (if I remember correctly), top ratings for the Structural Integrity/Cage (gotta double check that though), along with tons of Airbags. Aside from that, they've actually gotten quite big and heavy with the new body. I dunno, I was just impressed when reading about it. When how it would far against a Deville, sure the Deville's got a much stronger body, but I doubt it's designed to absorb much energy to save its passenger/s??

Just a thought.
 
#22 ·
I know my 420SEL is “safe” compared to cars of its time. But I’d really like to know just how safe it is compared to post 2000-year cars. Empirical data comparing W126 safety to modern cars is pretty hard to find. Does anyone know of any tests done between a W126 and, say, a 2010 Accord? I agree with the points made about physics. You can’t add airbags to a smart car and deem it safe. But I don't think we can assume that the size and mass of a 70s Deville coincidentally provides safety. Or even a modern truck for that matter. They're death traps.

I love the W126 because I know MB built the structure to be as safe as possible without relying on airbags as an afterthought to achieve a great safety rating. But, honestly, I’d love it if the W126 had 12 airbags!
After seeing the footage of a 1959 four-door Bel-Air completely taken out by a 2009 Impala ( and ) I don’t know how anyone could feel safe in old-school Detroit iron, even a 70s Deville. Those cars were built as if the designers intended to kill the occupants to prevent their hiring lawyers. I know that’s wrong-headed… safety just wasn’t an expectation in our society at the time (we played with Lawn Darts as children after all!).

Afterthought1: A coworker of mine was killed about six years ago in a Volvo I had helped her pick out. She was starting a family and wanted a safe car. She was driving over the pass from Idaho to Seattle and a motorhome lost the ski boat it was trailering and the rest was a headline in the obits. I have a mental picture of a boat trailer tang skewering the front windshield, but don’t know how the physics played out. I do know that there wasn’t a car made that would have fared any better in such a freak accident.

Afterthought2: On our modern highways, with Jersey barriers, I fear T-bones more than head-ons. And it's the side impact protection that's so lacking. I’d love a commuter car with fore-and-aft center seating and plenty of crumple zone/airbag protection all around the driver. 98% of my driving is solo to and from work anyway. I'm envisioning something that would be marketed as a modern twist on the 30s and 40s businessman’s coupe. Oops, sorry for the tangent.
 
#23 ·
I know my 420SEL is “safe” compared to cars of its time. But I’d really like to know just how safe it is compared to post 2000-year cars. Empirical data comparing W126 safety to modern cars is pretty hard to find. Does anyone know of any tests done between a W126 and, say, a 2010 Accord? I agree with the points made about physics. You can’t add airbags to a smart car and deem it safe. But I don't think we can assume that the size and mass of a 70s Deville coincidentally provides safety. Or even a modern truck for that matter. They're death traps.

I love the W126 because I know MB built the structure to be as safe as possible without relying on airbags as an afterthought to achieve a great safety rating. But, honestly, I’d love it if the W126 had 12 airbags!
After seeing the footage of a 1959 four-door Bel-Air completely taken out by a 2009 Impala ( and ) I don’t know how anyone could feel safe in old-school Detroit iron, even a 70s Deville. Those cars were built as if the designers intended to kill the occupants to prevent their hiring lawyers. I know that’s wrong-headed… safety just wasn’t an expectation in our society at the time (we played with Lawn Darts as children after all!).

Afterthought1: A coworker of mine was killed about six years ago in a Volvo I had helped her pick out. She was starting a family and wanted a safe car. She was driving over the pass from Idaho to Seattle and a motorhome lost the ski boat it was trailering and the rest was a headline in the obits. I have a mental picture of a boat trailer tang skewering the front windshield, but don’t know how the physics played out. I do know that there wasn’t a car made that would have fared any better in such a freak accident.

Afterthought2: On our modern highways, with Jersey barriers, I fear T-bones more than head-ons. And it's the side impact protection that's so lacking. I’d love a commuter car with fore-and-aft center seating and plenty of crumple zone/airbag protection all around the driver. 98% of my driving is solo to and from work anyway. I'm envisioning something that would be marketed as a modern twist on the 30s and 40s businessman’s coupe. Oops, sorry for the tangent.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top