The 2014 Mercedes-Benz C-Class, a popular luxury sedan, underwent rigorous testing to evaluate its safety performance. This report focuses on the small overlap frontal crash test, a challenging scenario that assesses how well a vehicle protects its occupants in a collision involving a narrow portion of the car’s front end. This analysis is crucial for understanding the safety strengths and weaknesses of the 2014 Mercedes C-Class.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) conducted these tests, and the ratings apply to 2013-14 models manufactured after December 2012. The specific vehicle tested was a 2013 Mercedes-Benz C 250 4-door model. It’s important to note that the Mercedes-Benz C-Class was redesigned in 2008, and for 2010 models, a driver’s knee airbag was introduced to enhance frontal crash protection. A significant update for models built after December 2012, including the 2014 Mercedes C-Class, was the reprogramming of the side curtain airbags. This reprogramming aimed to ensure deployment in small overlap frontal crashes, further improving occupant safety.
Two small overlap tests were performed on the C-Class. The first test involved a 2012 model where the driver-side curtain airbag did not deploy as intended. The second test utilized a 2013 model manufactured after the airbag reprogramming, and in this test, the side curtain airbag deployed correctly. While the ratings and specifications are based on the second test, the structural rating considers both tests as the vehicle’s structure remained unchanged.
The evaluation criteria for the crash test cover various aspects of vehicle safety. These include the structural performance and integrity of the safety cage, driver injury measures, and the effectiveness of restraints and dummy kinematics. The ratings are categorized as Good (G), Acceptable (A), Marginal (M), or Poor (P).
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Small Overlap Frontal Test | Marginal |
| Structure and safety cage | Poor |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | Good |
| Chest | Good |
| Hip/thigh | Good |
| Lower leg/foot | Poor |
| Driver restraints and dummy kinematics | Good |
Action shot from the 2014 Mercedes C-Class small overlap frontal crash test, showcasing vehicle deformation and safety systems.
The results reveal a “Marginal” rating for the small overlap frontal test overall. A concerning “Poor” rating was assigned to the structure and safety cage, indicating that the structural integrity of the 2014 Mercedes C-Class in this type of crash is a weakness.
However, the driver injury measures present a mixed picture. For head/neck, chest, and hip/thigh protection, the ratings are “Good,” suggesting effective protection in these areas. Conversely, the lower leg/foot protection is rated as “Poor,” highlighting a significant vulnerability in this specific crash scenario for the lower extremities. Driver restraints and dummy kinematics were rated “Good,” indicating that the seatbelts and airbags generally functioned well to control occupant movement.
Post-crash dummy position inside the 2014 Mercedes C-Class, illustrating footwell intrusion and its impact on survival space.
Analysis of the dummy’s position after the crash, in relation to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel, alongside footwell intrusion measurements, indicated that the driver’s survival space was not maintained optimally. This is a key factor contributing to the lower leg injury risk.
Side curtain and frontal airbags deployed effectively in the 2014 Mercedes C-Class crash test, protecting the head from impacts.
Despite the structural issues, the frontal and side curtain airbags performed as intended in the second test. They worked in conjunction to prevent the dummy’s head from making dangerous contact with жесткие structures or external objects, demonstrating a positive aspect of the safety system in the 2014 Mercedes C-Class.
Extensive footwell intrusion in the 2014 Mercedes C-Class crash test, leading to potential lower leg injuries and foot entrapment.
Intrusion into the driver footwell was substantial in both tests. This footwell intrusion is a significant factor contributing to the high risk of injury to the left lower leg and at least a considerable risk to the right lower leg. Furthermore, in both tests, the dummy’s right foot became trapped by intruding structure and the brake pedal as the left front wheel was forced rearward and inward during the impact.
In conclusion, the 2014 Mercedes C-Class demonstrates good protection for the head, chest, and upper legs in a small overlap frontal crash. However, the compromised structural performance leading to significant footwell intrusion results in a “Poor” rating for lower leg/foot protection. Prospective buyers of a 2014 Mercedes C-Class should be aware of these findings, particularly the vulnerability in small overlap crashes and the potential for lower leg injuries. While airbag updates improved occupant protection compared to earlier models, the structural weaknesses remain a concern in this specific type of severe frontal collision.
