English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

5 answers

the ability for any car to avoid an accedent is of more value than than it's smash capabilities and the 190 has what it takes suspension and brake wise
if the seat belts are used and a frontal collision occurs most likley the doors will still open and the occupants will walk away, a trip through almost any salvage yard [that carries mercedes] will prove this [almost always clean interior, doors open and no iv bags 4x4's or other ems debries found]
however it is a small car and and mass matters on impacts
my opinion on the anti darwinist approach of stability controls air bags on everything from the sides of the seats to full side impact curtains does'nt mean safer cars what is actualy needed is better drivers [let's face it if you are running 120 mph through a neighborhood posted at 25 mph you deserve to and should die.] if you take a life that is not your own, you should be put to death

2007-10-14 02:30:18 · answer #1 · answered by hobbabob 6 · 0 0

It is safe compared to other cars built in 1987. It is not safe compared to a modern Toyota Camry or most any new car of comparable size.

You actually don't want your car made of "tougher" metal, such as the 1950s American cars. You would think it safer, but actually its the opposite. What you want the metal to do when you have a wreck is crumple. That crumple absorbs the impact of the collision. Tougher metal that doesn't give transmits all the force of impact to the driver.

In a 1987 Merc you are dealing with safety technology that was cutting edge in 1987, which consisted probably of ABS and that is it. You probably don't even have a driver airbag, much less a passeger one that is standard on all modern cars.

You also don't have stability control or any other modern safety electronic programs.

So, if your choice is a 1987 MB or a 1987 Ford Mustang, you are safer in the MB. If the choice is a 1987 MB or 2005 Honda Accord, you are much safer in the Honda.

2007-10-14 09:27:53 · answer #2 · answered by h_charles 5 · 0 0

5? 23?
What kind of answer are you looking for? Clearly it won't be as safe as most modern cars - no?

Tougher metal??? What does that mean? Nothing! Design and engineering counts for safety, not the metal.

Having said all that, it was probably among the safest cars at the time...

2007-10-13 22:53:34 · answer #3 · answered by terje_treff 6 · 0 0

Those year Mercedes were built really solid and tuff. Even though it doesn't crumple it provides good protection.

If you feel around on the car it is all metal and solid.

If you feek around on a new civic (a good car) there is more plastic.

2007-10-14 10:02:08 · answer #4 · answered by vintageguitars92 2 · 0 0

mercedes are pretty well built all the way around, safety, comfort, performance, luxury, and style. any mercedes is gonna be a safe car

2007-10-14 04:26:08 · answer #5 · answered by Boo! 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers