The Mercedes-Benz C-Class underwent a significant redesign for the 2015 model year, introducing advanced safety features and updated structural engineering. This article delves into the safety performance of the 2016 Mercedes-Benz C-Class, analyzing its results in various crash tests conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). We will examine its performance in small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, roof strength, and head restraint tests, as well as headlight and front crash prevention system evaluations.
Small Overlap Front Crash Test
The small overlap front crash test assesses the vehicle’s structural integrity and occupant protection in a collision involving 25% of the vehicle’s front width on the driver’s side, striking a rigid barrier at 40 mph.
The 2016 Mercedes-Benz C 300 4-door model received a Good rating for the small overlap front test, the highest possible. The evaluation criteria and ratings are detailed below:
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Structure and safety cage | G |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | G |
| Chest | G |
| Hip/thigh | G |
| Lower leg/foot | G |
| Driver restraints and dummy kinematics | A |
While the structure and safety cage held up well, earning a “Good” rating, and driver injury measures were also “Good” across all body regions, the driver restraints and dummy kinematics were rated as Acceptable. The test indicated that the dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag but rolled to the left due to excessive forward movement allowed by the seat belt. Despite this, the side curtain airbag deployed effectively, providing sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from side structure and external objects.
Technical measurements from the small overlap test provide further insight into the vehicle’s performance:
Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Lower occupant compartment | |
| Lower hinge pillar max (cm) | 5 |
| Footrest (cm) | 10 |
| Left toepan (cm) | 5 |
| Brake pedal (cm) | 8 |
| Rocker panel lateral average (cm) | 2 |
| Upper occupant compartment | |
| Steering column | 1 |
| Upper hinge pillar max (cm) | 4 |
| Upper dash (cm) | 4 |
| Lower instrument panel (cm) | 4 |
Driver injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 161 |
| Peak gs at hard contact | no contact |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 1.0 |
| Extension bending moment (Nm) | 5 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.20 |
| Chest maximum compression (mm) | 21 |
| Femur (kN) | |
| Left | 1.2 |
| Right | 1.3 |
| Knee displacement (mm) | |
| Left | 3 |
| Right | 5 |
| Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%) | |
| Left | 0 |
| Right | 0 |
| Maximum tibia index | |
| Left | 0.50 |
| Right | 0.43 |
| Tibia axial force (kN) | |
| Left | 2.8 |
| Right | 2.4 |
| Foot acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 80 |
| Right | 73 |
The occupant compartment maintained its structure well, indicating a robust safety cage. Measurements showed minimal intrusion into the driver’s space, contributing to the low risk of injuries to the legs and feet.
Moderate Overlap Front Crash Test
In the moderate overlap front test, 40% of the vehicle’s front width impacts a deformable barrier at 40 mph. This test represents a significant portion of real-world frontal collisions.
The 2016 Mercedes-Benz C-Class earned a Good overall rating in the moderate overlap front test. The ratings breakdown is as follows:
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall evaluation | G |
| Structure and safety cage | G |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | G |
| Chest | G |
| Leg/foot, left | G |
| Leg/foot, right | G |
| Driver restraints and dummy kinematics | G |
All aspects of the moderate overlap test were rated “Good,” including structural performance, driver injury measures, and restraint system effectiveness. This demonstrates excellent occupant protection in this common type of frontal crash.
Technical measurements from this test further support the “Good” rating:
Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Footwell intrusion | |
| Footrest (cm) | 1 |
| Left (cm) | 1 |
| Center (cm) | 1 |
| Right (cm) | 1 |
| Brake pedal (cm) | 2 |
| Instrument panel rearward movement | |
| Left (cm) | 0 |
| Right (cm) | 0 |
| Steering column movement | |
| Upward (cm) | 3 |
| Rearward (cm) | -7 |
| A-pillar rearward movement (cm) | 0 |
Driver injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 148 |
| Peak gs at hard contact | 16 |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 1.1 |
| Extension bending moment (Nm) | 11 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.20 |
| Chest maximum compression (mm) | 22 |
| Legs | |
| Femur force – left (kN) | 1.6 |
| Femur force – right (kN) | 1.3 |
| Knee displacement – left (mm) | 1 |
| Knee displacement – right (mm) | 2 |
| Maximum tibia index – left | 0.40 |
| Maximum tibia index – right | 0.31 |
| Tibia axial force – left (kN) | 2.3 |
| Tibia axial force – right (kN) | 2.5 |
| Foot acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 36 |
| Right | 53 |
Side Crash Test
The side crash test simulates a typical intersection collision, where a vehicle is struck in the side by another vehicle.
The 2016 Mercedes-Benz C-Class again achieved a Good overall rating in the side crash test, for both driver and rear passenger protection.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall evaluation | G |
| Structure and safety cage | G |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | G |
| Torso | G |
| Pelvis/leg | G |
| Driver head protection | G |
| Rear passenger injury measures | |
| Head/neck | G |
| Torso | G |
| Pelvis/leg | G |
| Rear passenger head protection | G |
The “Good” ratings across all categories for both front and rear occupants highlight the C-Class’s robust side impact protection systems, including standard front and rear head curtain airbags and front seat-mounted torso airbags.
Technical measurements from the side crash test are as follows:
Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side
| Test ID | VTS1417 |
|---|---|
| B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver’s seat (cm) | -20.5 |
Driver injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head HIC-15 | 228 |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 1.0 |
| Compression (kN) | 0.3 |
| Shoulder | |
| Lateral deflection (mm) | 40 |
| Lateral force (kN) | 1.2 |
| Torso | |
| Maximum deflection (mm) | 35 |
| Average deflection (mm) | 32 |
| Maximum deflection rate (m/s) | 4.56 |
| Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) | 0.51 |
| Pelvis | |
| Iliac force (kN) | 2.4 |
| Acetabulum force (kN) | 1.2 |
| Combined force (kN) | 3.6 |
| Left femur | |
| L-M force (kN) | 0.4 |
| L-M moment (Nm) | 36 |
| A-P moment (Nm) | 74 |
Passenger injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head HIC-15 | 225 |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 0.7 |
| Compression (kN) | 0.1 |
| Shoulder | |
| Lateral deflection (mm) | 34 |
| Lateral force (kN) | 1.1 |
| Torso | |
| Maximum deflection (mm) | 22 |
| Average deflection (mm) | 18 |
| Maximum deflection rate (m/s) | 1.94 |
| Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) | 0.19 |
| Pelvis | |
| Iliac force (kN) | 2.4 |
| Acetabulum force (kN) | 2.0 |
| Combined force (kN) | 4.2 |
| Left femur | |
| L-M force (kN) | 0.5 |
| L-M moment (Nm) | 33 |
| A-P moment (Nm) | 51 |
Roof Strength Test
The roof strength test evaluates the roof’s ability to withstand forces in a rollover crash. The strength-to-weight ratio is a key metric in this test.
The 2016 Mercedes-Benz C 300 4-door achieved a Good overall rating in roof strength.
| Overall evaluation | G |
|---|---|
| Curb weight | 3,522 lbs |
| Peak force | 24,642 lbs |
| Strength-to-weight ratio | 7.00 |
A strength-to-weight ratio of 7.00 demonstrates that the roof can withstand over 7 times the vehicle’s weight, indicating excellent protection in rollover scenarios.
Head Restraints & Seats
The head restraints and seats are evaluated for their ability to protect against neck injuries in rear-end collisions.
The 2016 Mercedes-Benz C-Class with power leather seats received a Good overall rating for head restraints & seats.
| Overall evaluation | G |
|---|---|
| Dynamic rating | G |
| Seat/head restraint geometry | G |
Both dynamic performance and seat/head restraint geometry were rated “Good,” signifying effective protection against whiplash injuries.
Technical measurements from this test include:
| Seat type | Power leather seat |
|---|---|
| Geometry | |
| Backset (mm) | 38 |
| Distance below top of head (mm) | -14 |
| Seat design parameters | |
| Pass/fail | Pass |
| Max T1 acceleration (g) | 16.1 |
| Head contact time (ms) | 57 |
| Force rating | 1 |
| Neck forces | |
| Max neck shear force (N) | 21 |
| Max neck tension (N) | 464 |
Headlights
Headlight performance is crucial for nighttime driving safety. The IIHS evaluates headlights based on visibility and glare.
The 2016 Mercedes-Benz C-Class headlight ratings vary depending on the trim level and headlight type. All three headlight variations tested received a Poor overall rating.
Trim level(s): C 300 trim equipped with Lighting package (LED projector)
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall rating | P |
Low beams were deemed inadequate on straightaways and curves, with some glare. High beams offered better visibility but were still only rated fair to inadequate on curves.
Trim level(s): C 300 trim equipped with Premium 2 package (LED projector/reflector)
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall rating | P |
Similar to the Lighting package, the Premium 2 package headlights also received a “Poor” rating. Low beams were fair to inadequate, and high beams were inadequate on curves. Glare was not an issue with this configuration.
Trim level(s): C 300 trim (Halogen reflector)
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall rating | P |
The base halogen reflector headlights also received a “Poor” rating, with inadequate low beam performance and high beams inadequate on curves. Glare was not observed.
Front Crash Prevention (Vehicle-to-Vehicle)
Front crash prevention systems aim to mitigate or prevent frontal collisions through warnings and automatic braking.
The 2016 Mercedes-Benz C-Class offers two front crash prevention system configurations, with varying ratings:
System details: Optional Pre-Safe Brake (Superior)
| Overall evaluation | Superior |
|---|
When equipped with the optional Pre-Safe Brake system, the 2016 C-Class earned a Superior rating. The system successfully avoided collisions in both 12 mph and 25 mph tests and meets forward collision warning requirements.
System details: Standard Collision Prevention Assist Plus (Advanced)
| Overall evaluation | Advanced |
|---|
The standard Collision Prevention Assist Plus system received an Advanced rating. While it avoided a collision in the 12 mph test, it only reduced impact speed by 14 mph in the 25 mph test and does not meet forward collision warning requirements.
Child Seat Anchors (LATCH)
The LATCH system (Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children) is evaluated for its ease of use and effectiveness in securing child car seats.
The 2016 Mercedes-Benz C-Class received a Good overall rating for child seat anchors (LATCH).
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall evaluation | G |
The C-Class has two rear seating positions with complete LATCH hardware and an additional position with only a tether anchor. The system was deemed easy to use, with anchors that are easy to locate and maneuver around.
Details by seating position
| Position | Rating |
|---|---|
| 1 | |
| Tether anchor | easy-to-find location, no confusing hardware |
| Lower anchors | not too deep, not too much force needed, easy to maneuver |
| 2 | |
| Tether anchor | easy-to-find location, no confusing hardware |
| Lower anchors | none available |
| 3 | |
| Tether anchor | easy-to-find location, no confusing hardware |
| Lower anchors | not too deep, not too much force needed, easy to maneuver |
Conclusion
The 2016 Mercedes-Benz C-Class demonstrates strong crashworthiness, achieving “Good” ratings in key IIHS crash tests including small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side, and roof strength. It also provides good head restraint and seat safety and earns a “Good” rating for LATCH system ease of use. However, headlight performance is a notable weakness, with “Poor” ratings across all available headlight types. The optional Pre-Safe Brake system provides superior front crash prevention, while the standard system is rated as “Advanced.” Overall, the 2016 Mercedes-Benz C-Class offers a high level of safety, particularly in crash protection, but potential buyers should be aware of the headlight limitations.
