diesel driver - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

bullwinkle · #16 03-31-2007, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by babymog

Yeah, thanks for the engineering lesson, if I weren't an automotive engineer, I would probably still know that. My question isn't why more mass can be more, I drive a 40,000lb all-steel body-on-frame motorhome for that reason, even an S-class is road-kill. My question is why 3500# is any different than 3365. If you have studied crash dynamics since the '60s as I have, you might also note that for example, the T124 diesel is over your magic number, and the W124 under, a difference of 200# between them but the same crush space and structure in the front which could mean that you have driver-cabin intrusion faster in the left-offset collision with the heavier car.

My comment about the worthless crash-test videos you posted is that there is no reference point between them. The VW tests were at what speed? And left offset. The Mercedes test shown from the same angle was at what speed? And a FULL FRONTAL. No comparison can be made whatsoever unless the speed was the same and the conditions were the same, anybody knows that. Cripes man. Figures lie and liars figure, ... you need to base these things on real data and know the variables such as speed and %offset etc.

Now I've been in a (police forensics estimated) 85+ MPH left-offset collision between an E-150 (mine) and a Ford Thunderchicken.

One of my coworkers in Cleveland was involved in a similar crash-an Escort came right over a median and drilled an E-250 (fully loaded w/parts, probably 7500 lbs. total)-the Escort driver was killed instantly, my coworker walked away with a scratch on his left arm thanks to the airbag, the van was totalled, but mass wins just about every time. That's, IMHO, one of the downsides of the old VWs-no airbag + pop-can sheetmetal=too much risk to drive unless in rural areas @ low speeds-at least the Mercedes has the metal to protect the driver to some extent. I predict a run on the old, light, fuel-efficient diesel cars-if this Iran thing spirals out of control, even here in the Midwest we'll see fuel well over $3.50/gallon.

derherr65 · #17 03-31-2007, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bullwinkle

mass wins just about every time. That's, IMHO, one of the downsides of the old VWs

I would say that is their primary down side.

If you'll forgive the soapbox:
It's all about the driver. Cars are not dangerous, people are. People can't drive. Our 'drivers ed' is a joke. Licenses are given away like crackerjack's prizes.

IM(not so)HO people should be thouroughly tested and issued a rating based on their driving skill. Let's say 1-100 scale. Can you parallel park? 1/10 of a point. Can you stop safely from 70 in a straight line? Couple points. Can you avoid a pedestrian stepping out into traffic on a rainy day without damage to anything on a 2 lane road lined by parked cars? 10 points.

Your drivers license should have the rating prominently displayed. You may drive any vehicle rated at your score or less. By this method crappy drivers are forced to ride mopeds. Good drivers may drive trucks and Mustangs. Great drivers may tow or drive a ferrari. Driving fatalities would drop from epidemic to rare curiosities.

Anybody caught driving a car above their level gets fined heavily and their rating is reduced by half.

I miss the rant and soapbox smilies. (rant off)

Hatterasguy · #18 03-31-2007, 01:26 PM

If you are worried about crash safety then you should buy the latest model MB possible. The old ones certainly are not bad, but they have come leaps and bounds since the days of the W124/126/123. Even something older like a W210 gets you side air bags which are nice.

The newer cars have airbags that inflate depending on the type of accident, so if its minor they don't smack you in the face. Also side airbags are really nice!

Mercedes now has their "pre safe" system which will get the occupant into the perfect position for an accident and air bag deployment if a crash is going to occur.

The older cars are great, but my old W126's can't hold a candle to the W221 in a crash.

derherr65 · #19 03-31-2007, 01:30 PM

Very true. Just can't afford to.

Hatterasguy · #20 03-31-2007, 01:40 PM

Well then the old ones are safe enough, so don't worry about it. Thats the way I look at it.

Figure MB is usualy 10 years ahead in that department, from regular cars. So the W124 is probably on par with a mid to late 90's Honda or Chevy, in that area.

babymog · #21 03-31-2007, 02:54 PM

I'm not sure the low-speed rural area thing works Bullwinkle, in my crash I was stopped on a residential road, when a drunk running pedal-to-the-metal hit me head-on at high speeds, I had nowhere to go. It happens, and unfortunately it'll happen to someone you know someday.

After that collision, I sold my (then 4-year-old) 300TE 4matic, felt I would never consider my girls safe in the rear (3rd) seat. Custom-built 5,000+# body-on-frame vans for kid-hauling was the ticket for us.

I do like your licesing requirements DerHerr, I've been arguing (tongue-in-cheek) the same. Let's start tomorrow.

Putting all those likely to cause an accident in Yugo-class cars would lessen the potential damage that they could do, and help out old Darwin.

Personally I agree, it's all a compromise. I've always tried to look at the compromise from the past-tense; what's the worst that can happen, and can I live with that. I've been through that in a collision once and can look back with satisfaction that I did what was best. Choose what makes you comfortable. The 123 is stiff and has decent crash-avoidance (active safety), but updating to a 124 gives you better crash survivabiity and better crash avoidance. As Hatteras says, each new generation of M-B automobiles is a measurable evolution in safety.

Best of luck,

derherr65 · #22 03-31-2007, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by babymog

in my crash I was stopped on a residential road, when a drunk running pedal-to-the-metal hit me head-on at high speeds, I had nowhere to go. It happens, and unfortunately it'll happen to someone you know someday.

My girlfriend had a similar one. 60mph Honda with idiot teenager rear ended her stopped 1998? Chevy Tahoe, pushing it into an also stopped F250. All passenger positions in her Tahoe were ok, but the frame was in a nice rainbow and the body matched. Had she been in a compact car... I don't want to think about it. She now drives a 2001 Dodge Cummins 2500.

Oddly enough, right now I'm looking at 300SDLs. Like you say, couple hundred more pounds, couple more inches in each direction, little newer design, ABS and air bags, etc. while still getting 30mpg... if you're careful.

Oh, the licensing thing will never go, regardless of how good an idea it may be. There'd be lawsuits over discrimination, and car companies suing to get vehicles reclassified, and all that after the 35 years of so it would take the government to get it enacted and rolling. What will happen, I suspect, is that cars will get little black boxes that wait... and watch... and then jump out and take control when you attempt to do something stupid. And car prices will jump another $15k to pay for it. At that point someone will try to outlaw old cars. Eventually it will pass. Hopefully I'll be dead by then.

Hatterasguy · #23 03-31-2007, 07:37 PM

The W126 is actualy still a pretty safe car. They have front and rear crumple zones, and a very strong safety cage for the passanger compartment. If you look at the roof you will notices those two raised rails on either side. Those are not just for looks; they have a box structure inside kind of like built in roll bars. Their is also a thick steel plate between the fuel tank and rear seat.

Throw in the mass, ABS, air bag, and other safety features and they are pretty competitive.

derherr65 · #24 03-31-2007, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

Their is also a thick steel plate between the fuel tank and rear seat.

I wonder if it's more of a rear impact shield than flame barrier? You can throw a match in a puddle of diesel, and it will put the match out. That would be standard Mercedes overkill though.

Oh, and 85's have the 2.88 differential. If you're light on the throttle that means better mileage and quieter highway cruising. If you drive a lot of city it may work against you, so the earlier 3.07 could be better.

Hatterasguy · #25 03-31-2007, 07:47 PM

Probably both. MB made a lot more gas W126's then diesel so the system was designed for gas. Diesel W126's were only North American market, in the 80's.

derherr65 · #26 03-31-2007, 07:50 PM

Good point. Isn't that ironic. Usually we get shafted on the neat diesel cars. We're just now getting variable turbos, while europe has had them since... '95?

Hatterasguy · #27 03-31-2007, 07:58 PM

They got their revenge in the late 90's.

Oh the deeds I would do for a 1999 S300TD.

Intercooled 606, with a 722.6, in a W140 oh what a combo!

derherr65 · #28 03-31-2007, 08:00 PM

Lol!