SLK-Class (R171) 2004-2010: SLK200K, SLK280, SLK350, SLK55, SLK55 Black Series

SLK/R171: Has anyone seen SLK safety data?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old 07-19-2005, 11:29 PM
  #1  
Almost a Member!
Thread Starter
 
carthinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Has anyone seen SLK safety data?

Hi!

I'm actively considering a new SLK for a "fun" car. I really liked the SLK - but one thing holds me back. I can't quite get my arms around the safety data on the car. I can't seem to find any crash tests. It's a small car - but safety is pretty important to me. I've been considering a CLK350 or a Corvette as my other options. Both have pretty strong safety records. If I could convince myself that the SLK was a safe car despite its size, I'd grab one today.

If anyone has seen anything or has any guidance on this, I'd be really grateful!

Thanks!
Old 07-19-2005, 11:44 PM
  #2  
Member
 
wil_sutton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2005 SLK350
I've only actually seen what MB throws out there, but I feel safe... it's hard not to feel safe when you know you have 8 airbags for 2 seats... (although I understand it may be 6 in some markets. I've heard some markets do not include the knee bolster bags.)
Old 07-19-2005, 11:46 PM
  #3  
Almost a Member!
Thread Starter
 
carthinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by wil_sutton
I've only actually seen what MB throws out there, but I feel safe... it's hard not to feel safe when you know you have 8 airbags for 2 seats... (although I understand it may be 6 in some markets. I've heard some markets do not include the knee bolster bags.)
True. The roll bars are good too. But the car is light, narrow and short. Gives me cause to pause. But the thing feels very solid on the road. I just wish there was something else to go on!!
Old 07-20-2005, 12:35 AM
  #4  
Member
 
lennyr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: SF CA
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
'06 SLK55 AMG, del Sol VTEC
The car is light? It weighs 3,300lbs. That's heavier than a Corvette. My current car (SLK55 coming next month) weighs 2,400, and thanks to its agility I've never been in an accident with it (knock wood). With the power, handling, and electronic nanny features of an SLK, you should be able to avoid a lot of incidents a tank-like car would get into, and with the zillion airbags and other safety features, you should do pretty well in a hairy situation.
Old 07-20-2005, 05:28 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
bloflin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 310
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2005 SLK55 AMG
Originally Posted by carthinker
Hi!

I'm actively considering a new SLK for a "fun" car. I really liked the SLK - but one thing holds me back. I can't quite get my arms around the safety data on the car. I can't seem to find any crash tests. It's a small car - but safety is pretty important to me. I've been considering a CLK350 or a Corvette as my other options. Both have pretty strong safety records. If I could convince myself that the SLK was a safe car despite its size, I'd grab one today.

If anyone has seen anything or has any guidance on this, I'd be really grateful!

Thanks!
New Model, hasn't been out long enough to have enough data for a "safety record".

Best bet would be to look at the SLK320 for reference. As the size, shape, weight is similiar. Don't know about the structure (i.e. frame differences).

However, the actual cars are very different (style, options, engines, material, etc.).
Old 07-20-2005, 07:53 PM
  #6  
Member
 
RoadkingHI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Hawaii
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
05 SLK 350, 97 S420, 92 Jeep, 04 Kia, 28 Ford Tudor, 51 Ford F3, 01 Harley, 03 Harley
Originally Posted by wil_sutton
I've only actually seen what MB throws out there, but I feel safe... it's hard not to feel safe when you know you have 8 airbags for 2 seats... (although I understand it may be 6 in some markets. I've heard some markets do not include the knee bolster bags.)
I agree, with the numerous air bags (well hidden) and the roll bar, seat construction and quickness of the car I feel very secure and safe.... now of course this comes from a guy that just rode his Harley to work !!!!
Seriously, I had two cars totaled, both Mercedes, that were hit. I not only walked away (in both cases their had to be towed) but I drove away as well. VERY secure and safety minded in their manufacturing.
Old 07-20-2005, 10:16 PM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
vantage78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
2005 SL500
Originally Posted by carthinker
Hi!

I'm actively considering a new SLK for a "fun" car. I really liked the SLK - but one thing holds me back. I can't quite get my arms around the safety data on the car. I can't seem to find any crash tests. It's a small car - but safety is pretty important to me. I've been considering a CLK350 or a Corvette as my other options. Both have pretty strong safety records. If I could convince myself that the SLK was a safe car despite its size, I'd grab one today.

If anyone has seen anything or has any guidance on this, I'd be really grateful!

Thanks!
Sorry, I didn't know the Vette was a safe car? Not trying to be sarcastic...
Old 07-21-2005, 12:49 AM
  #8  
Almost a Member!
Thread Starter
 
carthinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by vantage78
Sorry, I didn't know the Vette was a safe car? Not trying to be sarcastic...

ME NEITHER!! IF you look at the iihs.org website, the corvette is statistically the safest car (not SUV) out there. Who knew! Now, that could have a lot to do with how it is driven - but still - impressive. Ever seen a vette w/o it's skin? It is a metal dune buggy.

The New SLK has more sophisticated airbags and a nice structure. I just can't get a safety sense on teh car. It weighs more than a vette (by a little), but it is smaller.
Old 07-21-2005, 04:48 PM
  #9  
Member
 
wil_sutton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2005 SLK350
I have to agree that the vette is fairly safe for its class. My grandfather was broadsided by an Escort going about 50 mph on the driver door in his '91 vette (he had several of them). He walked away with a cracked rib only, despite the softball size hole in the fiber on his door.

Dunno about the numbers, but from what I've seen they're not bad, but as with the rest of GMs, I can't imagine it's any safer than a benz.
Old 07-22-2005, 04:47 PM
  #10  
Almost a Member!
Thread Starter
 
carthinker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by wil_sutton
I have to agree that the vette is fairly safe for its class. My grandfather was broadsided by an Escort going about 50 mph on the driver door in his '91 vette (he had several of them). He walked away with a cracked rib only, despite the softball size hole in the fiber on his door.

Dunno about the numbers, but from what I've seen they're not bad, but as with the rest of GMs, I can't imagine it's any safer than a benz.
FYI: An interesting thing is to look at the results on wreckedexotics.com - the corvette looks very good in all of its hits. The SLK information is not too populated. The vette does well - the real issue for me though is -- what can I look to to say "Hey, the SLK that you like so much is a good, safe choice." Why shouldn't I buy a vette or an XLR if safety is very important to me. It's a hard one.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.

Quick Reply: SLK/R171: Has anyone seen SLK safety data?



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:07 AM.