Vs M5 (F10) vs. the Competition

[Merc1]

Right, can't wait to see the answer for that?

How can a crash test be "inaccurate". Now what it can be is non-represenative of a real world crash with something other than another car, a pole or other large fixed object.


M

 

[K-A]

This is going over your head, Merc.

So do you feel that Crash Test scores are the end all be all? Was the W211 E-Class insufficient in real world data (Safest Sedan), because it had moderate to lousy Test scores?

Call me a "Car Body Enthusiast", but how strong and well executed the frame/cage is, is of utmost importance.

Let's say BMW, like many other car makers, designed the F10 to pass Crash Tests at 40 MPH. Now, if the roof caves in at 40 MPH, then what would happen at 80 MPH, 100 MPH. Now, if the W212 shows NO deformation at 40 MPH, then I'd feel more comfortable in it, in the case of an extreme situation where the roof and side structures capabilities are put to the ultimate test.

Safety Scores don't always tell the whole story.

Now, back to Safety Cage strength:

You want proof? How about the W212's side structure remaining intact after a 40 MPH side collision (IIHS), while the F10's caved in? How about the W212 withstanding 21,000 lbs of force to the roof, while the F10 only 14,000? How about the W212 being Awarded a venerable Car Body Award? How about the W212 showing less movement (structure related) in the steering wheel and pedals (NCAP Tests). This is all proof, you know. Or how about the W212's record setting 72% HSS usage?

Now, if you can set aside "Crash Test Scores" which are irrelevant to my point, and focus on the structural capabilities/qualities at hand (you do realize that the structural strength isn't ONLY related to Crash performance, right?), then what proof do you have that the F10 shows a superior/stronger cage than the W212? Remember, all we can work with is via the data at hand, and I have quite a few. A purported and singular (no pictures, no official or independent release) higher torsional rigidity figure of the F10 won't cut it, true or not.

 

[K-A]

Can you back that up with any hard data?

Yes.

Look at the W210 and W211's crash test performance, find a car that scored better (easy to do), and then look at fatality rates (W210 and W211 were both amongst or at the safest).

Very simple.

How can a crash test be "inaccurate". Now what it can be is non-represenative of a real world crash with something other than another car, a pole or other large fixed object.


M

What do you think I'm trying to say?! Duh.

 

[Merc1]

What do you think I'm trying to say?! Duh.

That doesn't make the test inaccurate, it means that they don't have a particular test to cover something like that (which is unknown), bid difference between something that is inaccurate and something that isn't addressed. I have the feeling I just gave you your answer because you keep to make this stuff up as you go along. There is nothing "inaccurate" about a frontal-offset crash test because that can and does happen in the real world. Side swiping a concerte barrier does too, but they don't really have a test for that.


M

 

[klier]

How can a crash test be "inaccurate". Now what it can be is non-represenative of a real world crash with something other than another car, a pole or other large fixed object.


M

I've been wondering about this too since it's been brought into the discussion... A crash test is a crash test.

 

[Sunny]

Yes.

Look at the W210 and W211's crash test performance, find a car that scored better (easy to do), and then look at fatality rates (W210 and W211 were both amongst or at the safest).

Very simple.

I posted the crash test result for both W210 and W211, both did well, at least better than the 5 series of the same time. So stop with the bull shit that Mercedes scores poor in crash tests. They did not in the past (relative to the cars of that time) and they still don't. You are just making shit up.

 

[Merc1]

This is going over your head, Merc.

So do you feel that Crash Test scores are the end all be all? Was the W211 E-Class insufficient in real world data (Safest Sedan), because it had moderate to lousy Test scores?

No and No. However they way you make it sound here is that the E-Class is a tank and just impenetrable which clearly isn't the case. You still haven't said anything about the rear door opening on the E-Class? Is that not a problem?

Call me a "Car Body Enthusiast", but how strong and well executed the frame/cage is, is of utmost importance.

Tempted to say this is BS because you don't seem to know much about it other than what is on hand via Google, Wikipedia and the Mercedes press office. Are you an engineer in this field?

Let's say BMW, like many other car makers, designed the F10 to pass Crash Tests at 40 MPH. Now, if the roof caves in at 40 MPH, then what would happen at 80 MPH, 100 MPH. Now, if the W212 shows NO deformation at 40 MPH, then I'd feel more comfortable in it, in the case of an extreme situation where the roof and side structures capabilities are put to the ultimate test.

Is this something that actually happened in testing of the 5-Series or is this just specious nonsense from the land of make believe?

Safety Scores don't always tell the whole story.

True, stated that earlier.

Now, back to Safety Cage strength:

You want proof? How about the W212's side structure remaining intact after a 40 MPH side collision (IIHS), while the F10's caved in? How about the W212 withstanding 21,000 lbs of force to the roof, while the F10 only 14,000? How about the W212 being Awarded a venerable Car Body Award? How about the W212 showing less movement (structure related) in the steering wheel and pedals (NCAP Tests). This is all proof, you know. Or how about the W212's record setting 72% HSS usage?

Now, if you can set aside "Crash Test Scores" which are irrelevant to my point, and focus on the structural capabilities/qualities at hand (you do realize that the structural strength isn't ONLY related to Crash performance, right?), then what proof do you have that the F10 shows a superior/stronger cage than the W212? Remember, all we can work with is via the data at hand, and I have quite a few. A purported and singular (no pictures, no official or independent release) higher torsional rigidity figure of the F10 won't cut it, true or not

YET AT THE END OF ALL THAT (WHICH I'M NOT DISCOUNTING) YOU'RE USING CRASH TEST DATA TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIMS. HOW CAN ONE SET OF DATA BE INVALID WHILE THE OTHER SET (WHAT YOU CHERRY PICK) IS SUPPOSED TO BE SEEN AS GOSEPL AND TAKEN AS THE END-ALL?

How is that possible? Some of the stuff you keep posting has been debunked already. You're being hypocritical here because you're using crash test data to say that other aspects of the same crash test data is invalid.

I'm done with this dumb-ass conversation.



M

 

[K-A]

I posted the crash test result for both, both did well, at least better than the 5 series of the time. So stop with the bull shit that Mercedes scores poor in crash tests. They didn't and they still don't. You are just making shit up.

I'm sorry if you're incapable of searching various Tests, but the W211 nor W210 performed all that excellently in Crash Tests. The W210 in particular was a disaster in the pre-facelift model (IIHS). However, find ANY CAR (not just a 5-Series) that outperformed a W211 or W210 during their years (again, easy to do), and then find the IIHS fatality results from 2007 and 2011, and then from the earlier report than 2007 (I think '04-ish), and you'll see the W210 and W211 reporting the least fatalities of about any car crashed.

I must have worded it incorrectly. Crash Tests ARE of importance, and yes, in that exact crash, you can see which car outperforms the other. But these don't always translate into the real world, especially in the case of Mercs. However, to me, when talking about a Mercedes, BMW, etc. (of who I assume test cars in multiple angles, and have histories of mastering how to decrease load to occupants in these various crashes.... especially Mercedes), I put a lot of concentration into how over-engineered the safety cage is. Again, if M-B designs the W212 to look like you flicked it, in a 40 MPH crash, or designs it to withstand 21,000 of load to the roof, while BMW (let's just say, for the sake of argument) designs theirs to pass the 40 MPH test, but you can see deformation already forming, and only designs a roof angle/strength/whatever to withstand 14,000 lbs, I feel that the M-B may be the better bet to be in, if you see massive tests put toward the safety cage integrity.

It's as easy as this:

FACT: The F10 Scores better in the NCAP Crash Test Ratings (via data).

FACT: The W212's safety cage/body hold up better and stronger in the IIHS Side Impact Test, and Roof Strength Test (via Data and Pictures).

If you can't acknowledge that, then you simply have an agenda to push via the car you prefer. I find it interesting that some F10 fans can't at least acknowledge the substantial data and pictures that I have provided, in proving my "case", yet instead, resort to what they do have: NCAP Crash Test Ratings (again, irrelevant to my discussion, but yes, it scores better than in the NCAP.... SEE, I can acknowledge it!).

 

[Giannis]

This thread has got way out of hand and the discussion won't lead anywhere. Also, after my last warning, I have noticed quite a few nasty comments and posts.

Thus I am locking this thread right now, for all to chill out. The moderators will discuss the future of this thread.