77 240d my daughter turned left at a light and was hit by a ford Tarus doing about 45. Kid was "going to make the yellow". My kid at fault, car is a total loss hit at the rear door and wheel. Car folded up but did not move. Ford is not totaled but will take 3k to fix. Nobody in either car hurt and the benz was drove home but will not be on the road again. These cars are tanks, I would rather be in one of them than any airbag jap car.

There's no LSD in your SDL? Which MBZs do have Limited Slip Diffs?

Also, which MBZs had ABS standard or optional during the 80s?

-Aaron

I'm pretty sure the 560SEL is limited slip. My future plans include a 560SEL rear end for the LSD and taller final drive ratio (2.47 vs 2.88).

see this thread: http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/showthread.php?threadid=85165

uhh.. in order to go skidding off the side of the crevasse you have to be going "too fast for conditions". No airbag, ABS or computer (right now at least) is gonna keep you from putting your pedal too far down...

I know I'm gonna eat my words on the "computer" comment =)

And to reply to the technical side of your question, I'm sure MB diesels get about the same lateral g's of roadholding that any full size sedan/full size truck/Van does, so again, you are not any less safe than driving a caprice classic or F-150.

While tank-like MB's will fare better in a crash, its the driver that has to be aware and thinking first.

-John

__________________
2009 Kia Sedona
2009 Honda Odyssey EX-L
12006 Jetta Pumpe Duse
(insert Mercedes here)

Husband, Father, sometimes friend =)

John-

I agree. I guess what I mean is (as you said above re: roadholding ability of large sedan) that neither my BMW 320i or 635csi seemed to be coming anywhere close to "too fast for conditions," in the mountains, while the Volvos felt like that limit was about 20 MPH below the posted speed.

Don't Mercedes Benzes have rear suspension along the lines of BMW's as well? As in not a torsion beam?

-Aaron

About 7 years ago my wife and I were in a solo crash with a '92 Camry with a V-6. We were driving down the freeway in the L.A. area in moderate traffic at about 60 MPH and were suddenly cut off by a mindless driver in a van. In order to avoid a collision I had to make an evasive maneuver and in the process lost control of the car. We ended up colliding with a guard rail at full impact head on and then spun around fully and subsequently smashed the rear end. After it was over, we looked at each other and fortunately we were totally unhurt. The car was a mess. Amazingly, the air bag didn't go off. We were SO LUCKY not to be the least bit hurt. Another interesting fact was NOT ONE person stopped to check to see if we were OK. We waited for quite a while. When no one stopped, I tried to see if the car would still run and drive and it did! We drove made it home by surface streets.
That was the last straw,@#%!-ing L.A. people! We moved out of that #$@%-ed up state later that year.
I will never own another FWD car ever again due to their squirrelly handling characteristics in emergency situations.

__________________
DJ


84 300D Turbodiesel 190K with 4 speed manual sold in 03/2012

Joe- it sounds like you aunt had a similar situation as my aunt. She had her first wreck in 1989. She had a couple of small crashes in her 1991 Honda Accord in the early 90s. Her husband had a wreck in her 91 Honda one day in the downtown area. He was rear-ended by a 4x4 and was pushed into a back of a city transit bus. It was that week that we had the wreck in the new (at the time, with 3000 miles) rental 1994 Mazda I mentioned- that was in August of 1994. She was 6 months pregnant and had her 1 1/2 year old in the back seat. We was going about 45 mph when we hit the front axle area of a then new 1994 Chevrolet Cavalier. Our car took the brunt of the crash. She only suffered bruises and back problems as well, but the baby (now 11) was fine (except for being mean) , as was the unborn baby- who is now 8 years old. The seatbelts did a good job in this car at least. Also- all of the crashes she had in the 91 Honda Accord (motorized belts) she was unharmed in all of the crashes. Honda Accords and Civics did not get airbags until 1992, but all of the 90-up Honda Accords have good crash tests.

__________________
2004 Toyota Sequoia Limited 4wd
1991 Lincoln Town Car Executive
1991 Cadillac Sedan DeVille
1988 Mercedes 300SEL
1972 Chevrolet Caprice Kingswood Estate 9-passenger wagon
1973 Pontiac Grand Ville
(Prior MB's: 1974 240D, 1985 380SE, 1984 190D, 1993 400SEL)

Typing this for the FOURTH time, as I have typed 3 30 minute posts and keep hitting "BACK" like an idiot and deleting it. . I am obviously not going to retype all of that again, so I will keep it short.

The Camry like you had are safe cars. I remember that my old 93 Camry LE V6 was a solid feeling car and ALL Camrys have always had good crash test ratings. My 90 Lexus has a very solid feel to the sheetmetal and the doors and trunk closewith a solid "thunk". I am often amused that some people think that all Japanese cars have flimsy sheetmetal. That was the case with the older, smaller 80s models. They have improved, as has the safety cage structure- which is the real safety of a car. The Lexus, Infiniti and larger Acuras have always had good, heavy sheetmetal. The 80s VW Jettas have very flimsy sheetmetal, so it was not only the small Japanese cars. In the 90s some American cars had flimsy sheetmetal, while the Japanese cars improved.
I remember the major hail storm we had in 2002. My old 94 Lumina had more damage than my old 91 Accord had. The Accords have also always had good crash test scores. I have also noticed that my 98 Taurus has rather flimsy door sheetmetal. Keep in mind with these crash tests- it is like hitting another car with the same weight. It is true that the heavier car will fair better than the lighter car it hits.

Here are some auto safety sites that may be very helpful:
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ratings.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/default.htm
http://www.nhtsa.com/airbags/
http://www.nhtsa.com/

http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/00033.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/97005.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0129.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/00006.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0101.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0302.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0110.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0108.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0220.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0202.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/96026.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0314.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/96024.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0221.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0217.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0223.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/00031.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/98010.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0222.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/0123.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/99007.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/97019.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/97011.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/97022.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/97009.htm
http://www.hwysafety.org/vehicle_ratings/ce/html/97018.htm
Note how some of the small Japanese cars did better than the 90s VW Jetta. Notice the terrible results of the Dodge Neon and the GM minivans.

This is only a small sample. There are hundreds of more test results there.

__________________
2004 Toyota Sequoia Limited 4wd
1991 Lincoln Town Car Executive
1991 Cadillac Sedan DeVille
1988 Mercedes 300SEL
1972 Chevrolet Caprice Kingswood Estate 9-passenger wagon
1973 Pontiac Grand Ville
(Prior MB's: 1974 240D, 1985 380SE, 1984 190D, 1993 400SEL)

86560SEL- I'm not saying that the Camry was totally a bad car, afterall we came out unscathed in what could have been a potentially horrific crash. I was just appalled at how the easily the car lost control and that the airbag should have deployed, which it didn't. It's in my opinion that the car was entirely too front end heavy. The car was aparently still repairable after the wreck and was repaired ($6000+).
The front and rear end sheetmetal was very flimsy since it literally looked like crumpled up aluminum foil after the wreck. The passenger cabin sheetmetal on the other hand did not have one ripple and remarkably was undamaged.
IMHO though, the car should have been totaled.

__________________
DJ


84 300D Turbodiesel 190K with 4 speed manual sold in 03/2012

One thing to remember about modern cars, is that the extreme front and rear of the car are designed to collaspe and crumple- while the safety cage (passenger compartment) is supposed to be strong, without collaspe. The cars have crush zones- which allows the extremety of the front and rear of the car to soften and absorb the crash.

__________________
2004 Toyota Sequoia Limited 4wd
1991 Lincoln Town Car Executive
1991 Cadillac Sedan DeVille
1988 Mercedes 300SEL
1972 Chevrolet Caprice Kingswood Estate 9-passenger wagon
1973 Pontiac Grand Ville
(Prior MB's: 1974 240D, 1985 380SE, 1984 190D, 1993 400SEL)

True, and the resulting consequence of such designs incur very high costs of repair ($6000+ in our case) in the event of any collision. At any rate, I don't know why the car wasn't totaled.
I am still in no way a real fan of "modern" cars. While technologically they may be highly advanced, I personally prefer the ability to perform all my own repairs without the need of some poorly sequenced technical manual the size of a major metropolitan city phonebook or the need of tools designed by NASA.
Cars built in the 60's and earlier were far stronger than cars built today. They may have lacked some of the simplest of safety devices, such as seat belts, but those items are easily retrofitable. The previous owner of my '51 Cadillac totaled a mid 80's VW (which was brand new at that time) while only incurring light damage to the front bumper (it got pushed in a little) and did not suffer any injury in the process. The VW driver on the other hand, even though seat belted, ended up in the hospital with numerous injuries.

__________________
DJ


84 300D Turbodiesel 190K with 4 speed manual sold in 03/2012

One more quick question:

Anyone ever been in an accident with or in an early 80s VW Rabbit? What was the outcome?

Yes yes, I know this is an MB forum. I am still deciding between a diesel VW or an MB. I know it's not a tough decision: An old car that's beautifully designed but needs upkeep, or an old car that's kind of ugly and cr*ppy and needs a lot of upkeep. Guess which way I'm leaning?
(Going to look at a nice '85 300D and then an '81 Rabbit L today)..

But 45 MPG would be nice...

Thanks for indulging me, folks!

-Aaron

86560SEL.


If not mistaken MB started with crumple
zones in the late 70's.
In anycase way before the other carmakers
even new what the word meant(exept maybe
for Volvo).

Louis.

my son flipped an '89 jetta going 70 on an insterstate - one car accident ending up in the bushes/ditch. he walked away .
the seatbelt and german steel saved his life. no airbag in that vintage vw.

__________________
1984 300D Turbo - 231k....totalled 11/30/07 RIP

Surprise, surprise. MB came out with crush zones in 1951. That was when the concept of the hardcore safety cage took form. I believe Volvo came out with the three-point safety belt later on, too.