Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
Registered
Two '87 570SECs, one '87 560SEL
Joined
·
4,452 Posts
I absolutely love the last line in the video "So, next time you see a warning, remember this."

Since that red W126 crashed into stationary cars at 70mph and didn't even break ANY window glass, including the windshield nor deform the passenger compartment, I'm going to remember to drive my Tank every place I can. Let the rest of the folks drive the little, fuel efficient cars and I'll be happy with my 126.

Yep, I'll remember this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,749 Posts
I really miss Fifth Gear. Top Gear is okay, but Tiff Needell, Vicki Butler-Henderson, and my personal favorite, Tom Ford, gawd, that guy has a wickedly sarcastic sense of humor, which I truly appreciate...plus, I too am about 1.78 M tall and a solid 20 stone.

And, like everyone here, I'll keep driving my Euro Tank, thankyouverymuch....
 

·
Registered
w126,2jz gte twin turbo engine,6 speed gearbox, aero 1, zender spoiler, 0 to 100mph 11.5 s, LPG
Joined
·
190 Posts
what a car , living in thailand , i see crashes all the time , how lucky i am to drive such a safe car , for me and my family
 

·
Registered
1993 300TE, 1995 E320 Wagon
Joined
·
1,895 Posts
Great video!! I'm going to show it to my physics students (young drivers all) next year.

Also reminds me of this one, which was posted somewhere here before. When I showed it to my wife, she was even happier that I wanted to get my 560SEL.

YouTube - Australian Mercedes-Benz S Class commercial - late 80s

Drive safe, nevertheless!!

Dave
 

·
Registered
1983 500 SEC Lorinser 1971 280se w108
Joined
·
1,963 Posts
I wonder how well an SEC with its lack of a B pillar would have faired in the same accident...
 

·
Registered
1989 560SEL
Joined
·
227 Posts
That's impressive, I would have liked to see the MB get hit from the rear with a truck or another good car just to see how it held up.

Fifth gear is an awesome show its too bad speed dropped it.
 

·
Registered
Two '87 570SECs, one '87 560SEL
Joined
·
4,452 Posts
I wonder how well an SEC with its lack of a B pillar would have faired in the same accident...
Answer: Very well, thank you.

Ken Buck (MBCoupes.com) was "volunteered" to be the meat between two 18-wheelers. First 18-wheeler jackknifed and stopped, Ken stopped in his black SEC, next 18-wheeler jackknifed and smushed Ken into the first truck. The front of the SEC was smashed back to about the center of the front wheels, the rear was smashed forward to about a foot from the rear window.

Ken got out and not only walked away but rendered first aid to others in the accident, including the one that was helicoptered out. None of the glass in the SEC was broken, both doors opened and closed normally.

Very well, thank you.
 

·
Registered
1988 420 SEL about 52,000 mileage
Joined
·
354 Posts
Everyone probably noticed that the tail lights were still on after the video crash, meaning the electrical systems were still in tact.

That really is extraordinary. It makes me wonder though. Our w126 weighs a little over 3,700 pounds. I have heard that modern cars weigh considerably more for their size because of all the modern safety standards. So was our w126 way over-engineered (in a good way, of course) for its time and everyone else is still trying to catch up (with the exception of multiple air bags)? I can't see that there is an "or" to that question. How can you argue that anything is being done "better" than what we say in the video?
 

·
Registered
1983 300SD
Joined
·
891 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Why would you need the electrical system? Oh right, spark plugs... ;)
 

·
Registered
1983 300 SD; 2000 E320
Joined
·
1,099 Posts
the question is, is it mainly the superior structure or also the superior weight advantage?
if structure more than weight, then light, solid cars, like Porsche and Audi should be almost as safe as an equally solid, but heavier car.??
 

·
Registered
1983 300SD
Joined
·
891 Posts
Discussion Starter #16 (Edited)
Well, yes and no. The goal is for the front of the car to be utterly destroyed to take all the energy while leaving the cabin intact. I've been looking for some real crash test videos of the 126. I've only seen one. The front end basically disappeared and A-pillar didn't budge. Perfect performance. If I had to guess I would say it was at 45mph or better against a solid wall (you just don't see that in older cars). Say a new audi had an equally rigid structure. The two would fare just as well against a wall. However, if two cars with equally rigid structures were to collide the big guy would be the winner.

example:


That accident was at 70kph which is roughly 45mph. I'd say that if the 126 hit a man's car at 45 it would have been a little more messed up. Those tin cans definitely gave some cushioning. But nonetheless that's a solid accident. The front end was pretty trashed. I definitely think the 126 did so well for more reasons than it's superior mass.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
There's no denying the fact that Mercedes are built solid, but the older, larger car is not always safer, top gear did a test of old vs new as well.

YouTube - Fifth Gear: Crash Test Volvo 940 Estate vs Renault Modus

One more interesting point, you can take a quick passenger compartment safety test by jacking up one corner of a car, and making sure the doors still open close properly/line up. they do great on the Benz, but on my old Contour, they wouldn't close haha.
 

·
Registered
1983 500 SEC Lorinser 1971 280se w108
Joined
·
1,963 Posts
Its all about efficient crumple zones .W126 has the wieght advantage with heaps of chassis bulk and well engineered crumple zones to disperce the energy from an impact away from the pasenger area.If the car was totaly rigid ie:like a toy car, when you crashed the car would surive intact however your brain and internal organs would be soup ..... so your mercedes makes the ultimate sacrifice in a crash with its own destruction being the very thing that keeps you alive...
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top