35 mph = 56 km/h crash test of a 1990 Mercedes 190 2.6. The results are surprisingly poor, since the driver would likely be seriously injured as both head and chest are subject to high loads (hic=800, chest deceleration 60g).
Пікірлер: 44
@alyanni Жыл бұрын
Unbelievably better performance than a W202
@rotarded19832 жыл бұрын
Much better than the BMWs of the same era and even later on.
@whattheheck10006 жыл бұрын
The loads on this dummy weren't that bad, the limit for likely serious injury for HIC is 1,000 and for chest G's 60, but remember those limits were developed originally for cars WITHOUT airbags, the airbag spreads the load out. So a real person would probably have moderate head and chest injury, but it's very unlikely that their injuries would be severe and/or life threatening. June 17, 2018 10:09 pm
@mattiasjohansson17275 жыл бұрын
Probably, no car of its size was even close to the safety of a 190 in the 80s. They are really smaller than you think, yet they stood up to crashes very well. Other compacts of the era, not so much....
@user-sf7kl9uh7k Жыл бұрын
@@mattiasjohansson1727 I'd probably have to agree, the W124 was the safest in it's class at the time. They made a mess of the W201 though, a dreadful car, in every way.
@kamaukinyanjui87392 жыл бұрын
Excellent quality 👍 of the w201
@jfelipehoyos8 жыл бұрын
This car is a thank, really i am amzed, the space in the cabin is intact, the windshield unbroken due to any perceptibly flexion in the A pillar, Roof or dashboar., The structure is massive, probabby will keep it stable in a faster crash. the door will open easy, the seats provide an excellent support for the second impact, the belt pretensioner looks like dont work or not a equipped version, the crumplezone was in their begisn but i see did its work really i prefer a very rigid structure, i think there are better possibilities to survive than been split by the metals in many other cars.
@Supcharged12 күн бұрын
Much better than the contemporary E30 3 series.
@OneManOnFire8 жыл бұрын
35 mph into a brick wall I would find it hard to believe anything would survive.
@ViceMightBeTaken3 жыл бұрын
Except if they are in a merc
@user-sf7kl9uh7k Жыл бұрын
Any modern car would pass this test with ease. It's not very demanding, the 40 mph offset test is nearly X3 harder on the structure
@OneManOnFire Жыл бұрын
@@user-sf7kl9uh7k I would still find it hard to believe a current car would survive let alone the driver walking away
@user-sf7kl9uh7k Жыл бұрын
@@OneManOnFire So you're suggesting a 190's safer than a modern design? Safer than it's successors, even two or three generations newer?
@OneManOnFire Жыл бұрын
@@user-sf7kl9uh7k Newer cars are still safer as advancement in crash dummy sensors help. Newer cars are designed with lots of safety in mind. I still don't think you'll survive going 35mph into a bring l brick wall regardless.
@allworldmusic82702 ай бұрын
On offset test at this speed would have been different, still seemed to do well.
@VINI82318 жыл бұрын
Show others cars this class in crash in that time and then we talk benz rulezzz
@ImpactBlue2117 жыл бұрын
VINI8231 Let's talk about Saab.
@andrewbarton85255 жыл бұрын
@Matthew Dawood Khaghani they arnt except in one way. Safer for a pedestrian that hits them. Otherwise, you are wrong.
@IslamsBomb5 жыл бұрын
i want that white interior
@goranpavlovic9051 Жыл бұрын
its interesting that roof didn't distort at all, wow! this is a fucking TANK :D
@user-sf7kl9uh7k Жыл бұрын
Modern cars are much safer
@laservader18 жыл бұрын
"surprisingly poor" what a load of tosh
@exionem6 жыл бұрын
Still better than may cars today...
@tonimontana25 жыл бұрын
@Matthew Dawood Khaghani Not better then modern cars but light years ahead from other cars in the 80's
@teddietv27995 жыл бұрын
Henry Discipline dude you are Writing Crap lol , the w201 did very well . Modern Cars have better safety systems but construction wise the w201 is as good as modern Cars . Maybe better
@SuperBackhere4 жыл бұрын
@@teddietv2799 Don't mind that idiot. He is just a butthurt that seeks every w124 and w201 crash tests on youtube and talks shit about them.
@BlatentlyFakeName3 жыл бұрын
Merc built them tough back then. The panels are much thicker metal than on a modern car. Not great in a crash... for the other person.
@Tenavamersu3 жыл бұрын
Yep i have 5 190 in my garage😆😆😆
@Phoenix_cataclysm_in_204010 ай бұрын
Did it crash at 30mph or something? It was barely moving.
@zubanmate33164 жыл бұрын
We have this car :)
@coenraadvanessen23113 жыл бұрын
Who doesn't? It's the best.
@flubberlane84372 жыл бұрын
@@coenraadvanessen2311 I don’t 🤣
@sultanqasim2 жыл бұрын
Full NHTSA report here: nrd-static.nhtsa.dot.gov/reports/vehdb/v00000/v01400/v01459R001.pdf Chest acceleration is not bad actually. 60 G driver and 58 G passenger. For comparison, a 2022 Corolla gets 45 and 49 Gs respectively in the same test. Femur loads on the 190E are excellent, lower than many modern cars, due to the superb passenger cell strength. The 190E has a single stage airbag whose pressure was designed to prevent head impact even in higher speed (highway/autobahn) crashes, so it inflates to a higher pressure than the airbags other cars were using at the time. Modern cars have two stage airbags, with low pressure for slower crashes like this, and high pressure similar to the 190E for highway crashes. Similarly, the 190E’s crumple zones were designed to hold up in high speed crashes, while other cars from this era would run out of crumple zone in high speed crashes, and modern cars have multi stage crumple zones for low and high speed impacts. Looking at peak resultant acceleration for the driver head which could be more informative than just the HIC summary numbers (page 81 of the NHTSA PDF), the peak acceleration (in the curve, filtered data) is 60 Gs X axis, 80 Gs all axes resultant. For comparison, in a 2022 Corolla, it’s 40 Gs peak X axis, and 47 Gs peak all axes resultant. The multi stage airbags and crumple zones again make moderate speed impacts softer on the newer cars, but it’s not that bad on the 190E, with low risk for serious head/brain injury. The firm crumple zones and airbag pressure are tuned on it to remain safe and not run out of travel in high speed country road and highway/autobahn crashes.
@sultanqasim2 жыл бұрын
Also interesting to note is that in the crash test for the W202 C-class that followed the W201 190E, the W202 had a weaker chassis with a lot more crush and footwell intrusion. Thus, while the W202 has lower acceleration on the dummy (and so a better rating) in this moderate speed full frontal crash, it wouldn’t hold up as well as the older 190E in offset crashes and high speed crashes. I’d rather be in a W201 than a W202 or any non-Benz of this era in a high speed or offset crash.
@sultanqasim2 жыл бұрын
Here are the passenger cell intrusion numbers from the test (rear surface to firewall) W201: 25 mm (1.0 inch) W202: 170 mm W203: 50mm right, 60mm left W204: 18mm right, 2 mm left 2022 Corolla: 14mm You can see the passenger cell rigidity of the W201 was 20+ years ahead of its time, and way safer than the W202.
@Supcharged Жыл бұрын
@@sultanqasim the W202 was just awful time for mercedes. The W210 was also worse than the W124.
@TRIUMPHINTАй бұрын
Thank you very much for the link. 👍 It's very interesting.
@PyleHD3 жыл бұрын
Good car to repair after crash, not so good to survive, but always all the 3rs world shitholes calling it best ever and better than new because thry can't afford anything new. It is a great car in many aspects, quality being one of them but in crasg test, not se much be objective and realise that car being intact doesn't mean passengers survived.
@MyILoveMinecraft2 жыл бұрын
You can look up the G data to. Its really not worse than modern cars. The W201 was far ahead of its time when it comes to saftey. And yeah sorry look at the price of an 190e Evo I or II YOU can't afford that