For those considering a 2004 Mercedes-Benz SUV, safety is likely a key concern. The Mercedes-Benz ML-Class, popular in the early 2000s, including the 2004 model year, underwent rigorous testing to evaluate its safety performance. This article delves into the frontal offset crash test results for the Mercedes-Benz ML 320, a model representative of the 2004 Mercedes-Benz SUV design from that era. These results, conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), provide valuable insights into the safety characteristics of these vehicles.
The IIHS conducted a 40 mph frontal offset crash test on a 1999 Mercedes-Benz ML 320 4-door 4wd, which incorporated structural improvements implemented after March 1999. It’s important to note that these structural changes are relevant to models manufactured up to 2005, making the findings applicable to the 2004 Mercedes-Benz SUV models. The test assessed various aspects of vehicle safety, providing an overall rating and detailed evaluations of structural performance and potential driver injuries.
The 2004 Mercedes-Benz SUV, as represented by the tested ML-Class, achieved an impressive overall evaluation in this demanding crash test. Below is a summary of the ratings:
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall evaluation | G |
| Structure and safety cage | G |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | A |
| Chest | G |
| Leg/foot, left | G |
| Leg/foot, right | G |
| Driver restraints and dummy kinematics | G |
The table reveals a “Good” (G) overall rating, the highest possible, indicating robust crashworthiness. Notably, the structure and safety cage of the vehicle also earned a “Good” rating, signifying that the structural integrity of the 2004 Mercedes-Benz SUV held up well during the frontal impact.
Action shot during the frontal offset crash test of the Mercedes-Benz ML 320, demonstrating vehicle deformation and safety system deployment.
Looking closer at driver injury measures, the 2004 Mercedes-Benz SUV demonstrated good protection for critical body regions. The chest protection was rated “Good,” and leg/foot protection for both left and right sides also received “Good” ratings. Head and neck protection was rated “Acceptable” (A), still indicating a good level of safety. Furthermore, driver restraints and dummy kinematics were evaluated as “Good,” suggesting effective performance of the seatbelts and airbags in controlling occupant movement during the crash.
Post-crash dummy position inside the Mercedes-Benz ML 320, showing the maintained survival space and airbag deployment.
The images from the crash test further illustrate the safety performance of the 2004 Mercedes-Benz SUV. The dummy’s position after the crash (as seen above) demonstrates that the driver survival space was well-maintained, a critical factor in occupant protection. Minimal intrusion into the driver footwell area, as shown in another image, also contributes to reducing lower leg injuries.
Image showing the non-deployment of the passenger airbag in the Mercedes-Benz ML 320 crash test due to sensor detection of an unoccupied seat.
It is interesting to note the passenger airbag did not deploy in this test because the sensor detected an unoccupied front passenger seat. This feature, designed to optimize airbag deployment and reduce unnecessary risks, was a part of the safety technology in the 2004 Mercedes-Benz SUV.
Minimal footwell intrusion in the driver’s side of the Mercedes-Benz ML 320 after the frontal offset crash test.
For those seeking more technical details, the following measurements were recorded during the test:
Technical measurements for this test
Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Test ID | CF99012 |
| Footwell intrusion | |
| Footrest (cm) | 12 |
| Left (cm) | 11 |
| Center (cm) | 6 |
| Right (cm) | 6 |
| Brake pedal (cm) | 8 |
| Instrument panel rearward movement | |
| Left (cm) | 2 |
| Right (cm) | 1 |
| Steering column movement | |
| Upward (cm) | 3 |
| Rearward (cm) | 1 |
| A-pillar rearward movement (cm) | 2 |
Driver injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Test ID | CF99012 |
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 308 |
| Peak gs at hard contact | 66 |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 2.4 |
| Extension bending moment (Nm) | 34 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.42 |
| Chest maximum compression (mm) | 42 |
| Legs | |
| Femur force – left (kN) | 3.5 |
| Femur force – right (kN) | 1.8 |
| Knee displacement – left (mm) | 7 |
| Knee displacement – right (mm) | 8 |
| Maximum tibia index – left | 0.48 |
| Maximum tibia index – right | 0.40 |
| Tibia axial force – left (kN) | 2.7 |
| Tibia axial force – right (kN) | 1.5 |
| Foot acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 69 |
| Right | 62 |
In conclusion, the frontal offset crash test results for the Mercedes-Benz ML 320 provide a strong indication of the safety performance expected from a 2004 Mercedes-Benz SUV of the same generation. The “Good” overall rating and robust structural performance suggest that these vehicles offer a good level of occupant protection in frontal crashes. These findings can be valuable for anyone researching the safety aspects of a 2004 Mercedes-Benz SUV.
