Last post on Dec 04, 2013 at 8:41 AM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
BMW 3 Series, Infiniti G37, Acura TL, Lexus IS 350, Mercedes-Benz C-Class, Cadillac CTS, Volvo S60, Audi A4, Acura TSX, Car Comparisons, Sedan
Jun 23, 2004 (8:21 am)
I'm with Merc as well - The Europeans were concerned with car safety was Ford was still trying to place the gas tank on the Pinto for the best possible explosion. Japanese cars of the 70's and early 80's were also a joke.
Today in 2004 a lot of work has been done to even the playing field, but the point is the Europeans especially Mercedes, were dealing with this issue more seriously than anyone else.
Jun 23, 2004 (9:20 am)
There are pictures all over the net of Mercedes and Volvos that have been completely demolished up to the A-Pillar and the glass didn't even break! I'd like to see anything from Japan or American do this. The current Acura RL bent up like an accordian in the last round of testing it was subjected to. The car literally "broke" after the A-Pillar, not before it.
Visit an Imprezza forum. Those nutjobs wrap their cars around EVERYTHING and somehow that tinny-little econo car's passenger cage is fine over and over.
Sorry, I don't buy into the hype about european cars being safer than other cars and the most specific target of such claims: japanese cars.
I've been t-boned before while in a VW Golf (truck smacked us at 40 mph) and walked away fine- the energy of the crash was absorbed around the passenger cell. At the time I though, "Wow look how safe these German cars are" but after really looking into it I can't say the results would have been much different if we'd been in a civic or corolla. Probably different in a bimmer, as side protection is crap but other small cars seemed to fair fine in side collisions.
Buy into the marketing, that's fine. I don't for a second believe an MB or Volvo is head and shoulders safer than any other late model Japanese luxury brand.
I don't give a hoot what MB did safety wise in 1970, 80, 90. Doesn't matter to me. The cars made today by most luxury makes - BMW accepted - appear to have leveled the playing field to the point that declaring MB safer by virtue of its history just seems incredibly bias.
Jun 23, 2004 (9:47 am)
"I don't give a hoot what MB did safety wise in 1970, 80, 90"
Matters to me and I don't buy into the marketing, just into what they did.
Jun 23, 2004 (9:59 am)
Why would MB's actions in the 70s. 80s and 90s matter to you now? Unless you own one of their cars from those eras, it's irrevelent.
Please don't babble about how nobody would have done it then. Bah. There's nothing new under the sun simply variations. If Honda hadn't been first out with their VTEC somebody else would have come out with their version.
Jun 23, 2004 (10:32 am)
“Bah. There's nothing new under the sun simply variations.”
Bad attitude. Chuck Dickens would never approve. The Internet is new. And you don’t have to dig hard to find other things… oh and yes…
Do do, do do, d-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o… I got a NEW ATTITUDE!!!
Jun 23, 2004 (10:51 am)
"Please don't babble about how nobody would have done it then. Bah."
Aren't we all babbling? Some more than others .
There was a vast difference in the German cars of the 70s/80s and the Japanese and American cars. German cars were built like tanks, Japanese cars were built like tuna-fish cans.
But we digress, and I agree this has nothing to do the comparo between a 3 series and a G35.
Jun 23, 2004 (10:51 am)
I'm with blueguy here. I really don't see any valid backing behind the notion that European cars are safer than Japanese cars in the same class.
Jun 23, 2004 (11:28 am)
Mercedes' were better in the 70's... in fact Mercedes was infinitely better than Infiniti back then!
Just like yesterday lease rates dont mean squat, neither do yesteryears cars unless you drive them. An airbag alone makes any car better than anything out there in the 70's! How safe was a mercedes sl convertible when a 71 coupe de ville with out a crumple zone came head on into it. I guues no safer than me when a hummer h-1 comes 4 wheeling over my G...
#2468 of 16982 chrisboth
Jun 23, 2004 (8:20 pm)
"There's your crumpled to the a-pillar with no windows broken shot on the right. This car is a best pick you'll notice as well. Volvo Schmolvo..they are all pretty good in this class...focus civics and cavaliers - why are those in here?"
Your video is of a controlled test. Means nothing on the highway at 65mph. If you visit Germancarfans.com you'll see Mercedes and other European cars like Volvo and Saab that have been crashed in anything but a controlled, white-coated engineers watching situations and their passenger cells are intact. My problem with these test is that some car markers are probably designing their cars to pass these test only, with real world concerns going out the window. Why are Civics in here? Someone is suggesting that all cars are just about equal when it comes to safety. Why should it matter if they cost a lot or if they're cheaper models? Aren't people who buy Cavaliers and Focuses entitled to safety too?
My point about the Acura RL is that it failed a crash test and it supposed to be Acura's top car. Meaning that not all luxury car are created equal in terms of safety. I'm not shocked that you don't care about what Mercedes or Volvo did in the name of safety back in the day, long as you know that the car you're driving now benefited from what they did. Crumple Zone engineering didn't just fall from the sky. You're suggesting that all the research these companies did years before anyone else had clue puts them merely equal with companies that didn't even care about safety 10-15 years ago. Not even to suggest that MB or Volvo is safer because of what they did in the past. If you check into Insurance data in Europe on European cars you'll see where Volvo, Renault, Mercedes and others have proven they are safer than the majority of Japanese cars. It is well documented that Mercedes, Volvo and Porsche in particular addressed certain safety issues (like rear impacts) before Toyota, Honda, GM, Ford even began to research the problem. Now the government is going to set a standard, years and years after the hard work was done by you know who. But I'm to believe that Corolla is as safe a Volvo or Mercedes. Ok.
Jun 23, 2004 (9:30 pm)
Sure, I'd much rather be in a MB or Volvo over a Corolla in the event of an accident. A higher priced sedan will probably have more mass, structural rigidity, and safety equipment. What is relevant are Euro vs. Japan cars in the same class.
Haven't really seen any evidence that the 3, C, Saab, and Volvo are any safer than the TL, G35, ES, or IS. Or that the S and 7 are any safer than the LS or the Q. Or that the X5 and ML are safer than the RX, MDX, or FX.