Whats sad is the presafe braking system once almost got me into an accident the first week I got the car. I was on the outerbridge crossing (Large bridge in NY.) I was driving with my brother and all of a sudden the car started beeping, my seat moved up and the car slammed the breaks at full force. Thankfully no one was behind me. After that, I turned off the coffee cup, lane assist etc. Probably the biggest mistake I made as it could have saved the car.

 

Never was a good gambler, just got luckier in life instead.

 

is pre safe standard on all the cars, or just with the active safety measures

 

Didn't know that presafe braking went crazy on you before. It's hard to tell whether turning it off is right or wrong, since your presafe braking could have possibly got you in an accident in the first place.

Not all functions of presafe is standard on all vehicles. When touching the door handles without the key around, the screen always has on display something like: "Not all features of the presafe are enabled, check your manual." I went to check the error messages section and found it's normal since my car doesn't have Distronics.

With what you had described on presafe braking going haywire, I would be afraid to have it on. Again, it seems like technology designed to protect us can also get us into trouble if malfunctioning.

 

Wow, that is incredible. In anything less than a Merc and I'd hate to think what would've happened. Definitely makes the premium price of the car worth every cent. Glad you're ok man. When I saw the photo's I thought the impact would have been 60mph+

I always wonder how many lives we could save if everyone in the world drove an E-Class or equivalent...

 

Holy SH**!!!! GLAD YOU MADE IT OUT OKAY!!!! The car did its job. That is by far the most pulverized pic of a W212 I've seen. With how strong the safety cage is, those pics look like they should be in excess of 80+ MPH. 45 MPH shouldn't do much more than use up the frontal crumple zones, but different types of accidents, different positions, different momentum, etc. could play a role I guess.

Did your car have Pano, BTW? The opening of the roof looks big enough I think. If so, I wonder if a non Pano car's roof would have held up better?

It's actually all in the engineering!

 

Hitting a 20+ ton truck doesn't help even at 45mph. The roof was a non pano. If it was a pano roof, there would be much roof left at all.

Guys thanks for all the kind wishes. Even a good driver has a bad day and a simple lapse in judgement can be deadly. Keep your eyes on the road!

 

ya man, its all relative. 45mph is deadly speed...it just doesn't register because we are just used to the band of speed within which we drive...we don't feel 45 is notable because its such an easy cruising speed. But going from 45mph to 0 in the blink of an eye can is devastating.

Take MB5's advice and drive safely. I know I stopped reaching for my phone this weekend after seeing those pics....but is hard cause I like to use the map/traffic on my phone cause our NAV sucks a$$....but I'm putting it down till lights and rest stops from now on.

 

can pre safe braking be added later? if you didnt order it originally?

 

Most likely no. So far, MB always said no to anything needing to be added afterward. With pre-safe, there needs to be that front grill sensor and likely the additional wiring. Thus I'm fairly sure the answer from MB will be no. Anyway, give your local MB a call and see what they say.

Indeed, I'm still in shock this morning when thinking about those crash pictures I saw for the first time yesterday evening. Yup, the less glass for the sunroof, the better. It's too bad MB doesn't offer US consumer a solid metal roof as they did with other countries. I've seen pictures of E63s in other country with solid metal roof.

Sorry for going off topic here: K-A, I noticed you had a '10 E350. What prompted you to change from a '10 to '11 E350? I thought both cars are pretty much identical.

 

Funny you post this because this is posted by owners in every forum from MB, BMW and Audi owners. The fact is that your E-Class is no safer than any other car that would have the same safety rating as an E-Class. Most equivalent cars from BMW and Audi all have the 5 star rating from Euro NCAAP. IIHS also have the same ratings from BMW and Audi. All have top ratings so it just isn't an E-Class that is safe.

 

A non-pano roof most likely would have held up the same or worse. My reasoning is that the metal roof has no more reinforcement than the glass pano roof. I think the pano roof with the tempered glass with reinforcement would be stronger as tempered glass is as strong if not stronger than concrete.

As for the engineering part if it works great but as we can see that the OP had a problem with the pre safe system already.
IMO I rather me be in control of the car at all times rather than the car interjecting when it thinks it should. What if the car interjected at the wrong time and kills someone or causes heavy damage to the car? Wonder who will pick up the tab for the damage then? MB will say nothing is wrong with the system etc., and then the owner will be left with a big bill to pay because something malfunctioned. I rather I make the mistake and I pay for it myself.
I love ABS and other more passive systems but pre-safe and all the other distance cruise control stuff I can be without.

 

go to church and thank GOD cause it's a miracle your ok!

 

Most people just look at the number of stars and assume two cars each with the same number of stars are equivalent in safety. What people need to look at are the actual numbers and data. There is a section in IIHS and NCAP that has all the actual numbers. Going through those numbers between cars will show you the real picture. Obviously, there are many different units for those numbers so it will take quite a while for an average person to learn about what all the units mean. I did that and it took me a whole day to just understand the entire process of crash testing. I'm fairly sure most people don't go through that extent. In the end, it was apparent that W212 was much better than its competitors. One good example--look at the number for roof strength between MB and BMW. You will be surprised.

As we all know, strength means nothing in a crash. What's important is for the structure to absorb the energy that would otherwise get transmitted to your body, resulting in fractures, lacerations, etc. Thus having a rigid glass roof doesn't help. We all know glass can bend, but definitely not to the degree that metal can bend and twist.

Think of it this way: Would you be safer in a solid 10-inch thick metal container going into a wall at 45mph, or in a metal container designed to bend and twist and absorb the energy? The answer is obvious. Sure, the thick metal container would look better after the crash, but who cares about what the container looks like if the occupant becomes minced meat jello at the end.

By the way, definitely agree on the danger of all these complications ie pre-safe. Sometimes, people really need to stick to the adage, keep it simple.

 

Yeah, they are pretty much the exact same thing. I went to a Dealer to check out the new CLS, open to the notion that with M-B's incentives nowadays, these Salesman will throw you everything but the kitchen sink to get you into a new car (and take your old one, as Used Car prices are at record highs). However, I LOVED my 2010 and had no plans to get out of it at all (so much so that I wanted the exact same car basically when I switched to the 2011).

The CLS had no frontal headroom for someone of my height, and I wasn't all so enamored by it. They were doing everything they can to get me into this 2011, and I finally threw them a Lease payment so low (much lower than my 2010's payment) it was my "I'll have to take it" number. They met it, and I went forward with it. If I keep this car after the Lease (which I'm kind of planning to), however, those savings won't stack up so well, and in the long term I will have paid a lot more for this car. Oh well.

 

Actually, reading between the lines shows that the E is still the safest bet. Not only does the frame look UNTOUCHED while other new cars, including the 5-Series, have caved in roofs and side B-Pillars, but the roof strength is at the top of all cars as well. Much stronger than the 5-Series' roof (both cars get "Good" ratings, however). Also, remember that about anybody can pass "Safety Tests" nowadays, but the W210 and W211 E's proved that even with less than great safety scores (neither cars were so impressive in Standardized Tests), they both showed up to have the LEAST FATALITIES of all similarly sized cars (or in some cases, all cars in general) in terms of real world crash data (where M-B's have always especially shined).

Also, the E uses advanced steels not found on the vast majority of other cars (Mega High Strength Steels), and used a higher total of High Strength Steels than any car in history, at the time of its launch. Not to mention, the W212 received the Award for "Best Bodyshell" in 2009, beating all others, including the Jaguar XJ, Audi R8, and BMW 5-Series GT.

Or just write a letter to the people really responsible: M-B's safety engineers. Maybe Lady Luck for good measure.

 

In frontal and rear end crashes what you are saying is completely correct as there is room for absorbtion of this energy as it compresses along with transferring the energy to the rest of the frame.
If you look at the roof and also rollover cages they have no such technology. Basically is make the structure as strong as possible while trying to deflect the energy. So if you look at the Panarama Roof like you said the Glass is strong than the metal than the Panarama Roof is stronger than the Metal Roof.

Lets look at the numbers. NCAP

Frontal impact

E-class - 13.9
BMW - 15.5
Audi - 14.9

Sid Impact car/pole

E-Class - 8.0/6.7
BMW - 8.0/7.4
Audi - 7.5/7.0

Rear Accident Whiplash

E-Class - 2.5
BMW - 3.3
Audi - 3.3

IIHS

All three cars received a Good across the Board.

Unless you have other evidence please post but with the NCAP and IIHS testing these are the results and shows E-Class actually weaker than the competitors rather than stronger.

Note: These are results of current generation cars.

 

K-A all the pictures and HSS looks good for argument but the NCAP results is what really counts. Reason is they actually use Dummies with sensors that monitor how much injury or risk of injury an occupant would sustain in different type of accidents. No need to read between the lines it is all in the results. This is the most accurate type of measuring the safety of a car that you can get. These are multi million dollar dummies with sensors that register any impact on the dummy.

Also another reason for more injuries to BMW and Audi drivers compared to MB drivers can be due to age. Younger drivers in both Audi and BMW are in more serious accidents than the more mature drivers in MB's. The average age of BMW and Audi drivers roughly 6-7 years younger than MB drivers. This play a huge part in the stats you just mentioned.

Look I am not here to bash the E-Class but I was just trying to indicate to the poster who said the E-Class is much safer than all other cars is not accurate that is all. Please don't take it as an insult to the E-class owners. It is actually growing on me. If I didn't have such a sour taste from MB corp. I would actually buy one.

 

Perhaps those test results that NCAP did are favoring the 5 and A6 because M-B's structure is TOO stiff? All facts show the E's structure is stiffer, data accompanied by the IIHS aftermath pictures of the E's structure VS the caved in roof of the 5-Sereis, and the E's roof being almost 50% stronger than the 5's roof, etc.

The reason why this doesn't bother me, is because M-B has historically earned my "trust" in terms of real world fatality/injury data, with cars that have always performed worse than many others in standardized tests. M-B says they develop their cars for "real world safety", and I'd call that a typical BS corporate statement, if they didn't have historical data to back it up.

Therefore, when it comes to M-B, I don't really analyze how standardized tests show load levels to the body, as much as I do data showing how the structure is built, how strong it is in the case that it is truly put to the test, etc.

As for age, M-B and BMW drivers are typically the same age, according to data compiled that I've seen (BMW averages about 1-2 years younger on average). I think most of that is just BS stigma (if you look, they seem to be the same age typically, anecdotally speaking).

 

So lucky, maybe there is a plan for you
I am now concerned about MY reaction times, I always said I would pack in the fast cars (2010 E63) when I felt I was no longer able to react quickly enough, your reaction time saved your life.
But then you could have been in any car and at 45mph, thats not kicking it.
BTW I am in OZ and thats the side we drive on.....
Getting another one?
Been driving lately? I would have been very nervous.

 

K-A where are you getting your information about age being the same? Can you post it because where I have looked the are saying different.

The historical data is skewed by the age factor that I indicated below.

Here are links from studies done by companies who looked at the average age of drivers for different brands. It isn't a myth that you are indicating.

http://www.tescocompare.com/why/medi..._and_age.shtml

http://www.buyacar.co.uk/car_news/ar...ass_5187.jhtml

The first is most likely more accurate as it is from an insurance study, but either way both indicate that the Audi and BMW drivers are 5-6 years younger than the MB drivers. So it isn't a myth that you are talking about. I think you can see this also in the forums and on the roads.

Just because the pictures show that it LOOKS LIKE the E-class came out more intact doesn't mean anything since you don't know what happened to the occupants inside. All the ratings are also Good for 5er and E-Class even though you say the E-class LOOKS LIKE it came out better. NCAP still is a better indicator since we know which one came out better.

 

I have to find the source I was referring to in terms of the age differences, but I do remember whatever it was, it showed them being similar.

Either way, the age difference would really come from the 3-Series, which accounts for over half of BMW's sales, if I'm not mistaken. Every time some d-dag on the road thinks it's Laguna Seca Receway and is twirling in and out of traffic, poorly driving to the point of putting everyone in danger in all corners of him/her, it seems to be a BMW driver, so maybe the age difference is pretty prevalent.

I'm not denying the crash test statistics, however, like I said, those aren't so significant to me, as real world data has rarely reflected standardized data. Case in point, the previous 2 E-Classes. What I'm looking into is frame strength, which is where I find the E shines. Aside from that, I trust M-B's safety development team and their gauging of driver safety in multitudes of crashes over standardized tests, not due to blind faith or ignorance, but due to M-B's proving time and time again that the way that "they do it" is superior to how the tests do it. The roof is a significant portion of a safety cage's integrity, and the 5-Series showing a cave in during the side test, and a weak roof strength in the IIHS's actual "Roof Strength" test, shows me that perhaps the car wouldn't fare so well, relatively speaking, in crashes that are different than the strictly (and easy to pass) standardized tests.

 

It would be nice if I get a similar opportunity of having a newer car at a lower payment. I would have done the same with W212, too. Yes, from a utilitarian point of view, E is definitely more useful than the CLS. In fact, the estate would have been even more useful. The complaint about CLS's front and rear headroom is quite common.

Okay, back to the crash topic. Certainly a lot of interesting information posted above--especially the highest high strength metal content (didn't know about that one).

Overall, everybody's points are all valid. While the structural integrity of a post-crash vehicle is important, rieger's point about the actual energy registered on the dummies' bodies are possibly even more important. In terms of the absolute structural strength, it seems that W212 is definitely more rigid. Way less side impact intrusion (lower number is better) of W212 cm over 5 series: 5cm difference which is huge. W212's roof strength's absolute number that is much higher than the 5-series; similar result of C-class compared to competitors show it is likely no accident that MB knows how to strengthen the body.

At the same time, we have to keep in mind all these crash testinsg are only done at a specific speed in order to make a comparison. Obviously, none of us will be able to say for sure if the forces on the dummies compared to other competitors will remain the lowest as the speed increases, when the car's structural integrity will possibly play a bigger role.

Of course, it's very likely the average owner's age for BMW and Audi are much lower than that of MB.

About the NCAP numbers, I will have to go back and read if a higher number is better or the other way around. Somehow, I have not been able to open their website in the last ten minutes--maybe it's briefly under construction.

All in all, I think this thread is very constructive in raising a discussion about car safety and close look into crash testing. The entire crash testing and car safety is a very complicated matter with so many possibilities and variables that will have all of us debating forever without any final conclusion. Overall, I think everyone needs to look at the numbers and get an overall pictures of an individual vehicle. Unfortunately, the average consumer simply doesn't do that and that's why all those institutes come up with simplified things like "stars" for people who don't really want to do their homework.

That's the reason I'm staying with cars that get evaluated by all major institutes. By the way, guys, I personally wouldn't go for a real exotic car like Ferrari, Pagani, or Lambo for daily driving simply because of that. How much crash data do you all think is out there for those type of cars?! Yes--nearly nil. Yes, those carbon fiber occupant structures are strong, but it's like my analogy of being in a 10-inch thick tank going into a wall at high speed.

 

All three cars are safe, we get it. Not to change the subject, but the biggest concern is Thank God our fellow MB member,the OP, is safe and survived that horrible crash. Speedy recovery Brother, I know its been a month and your still sore but we are all glad your OK.

 

Totally insane! I can't believe your car took a impact like that and you walked away. Glad you're okay.