The 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class, a luxury sedan, underwent rigorous testing by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) to evaluate its safety performance. This article delves into the detailed crash test results, providing a comprehensive overview for potential buyers and automotive enthusiasts interested in the safety aspects of this vehicle. The C-Class, redesigned in 2008, received further safety enhancements in 2010 with the addition of a driver’s knee airbag, and again in 2013 with reprogrammed side curtain airbags for improved small overlap frontal crash protection in models built after December 2012.
Small Overlap Front Crash Test: Driver-Side Evaluation
The small overlap front test represents a challenging scenario where only a small portion of the vehicle’s front end impacts a rigid barrier. This test is particularly crucial as it simulates crashes with objects like trees or poles, impacting the car outside of the main energy-absorbing structure.
The IIHS conducted two small overlap front tests on the Mercedes-Benz C-Class, one on a 2012 model and another on a 2013 model manufactured after December 2012, which incorporated the updated side curtain airbag deployment. While the structural rating is based on both tests due to the unchanged vehicle structure, the ratings and specifications primarily reflect the results of the second test where the side curtain airbag functioned as intended.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Small Overlap Front: Driver-Side | Marginal (M) |
| Structure and safety cage | Poor (P) |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | Good (G) |
| Chest | Good (G) |
| Hip/thigh | Good (G) |
| Lower leg/foot | Poor (P) |
| Driver restraints and dummy kinematics | Good (G) |
Despite good ratings for head/neck, chest, and hip/thigh injury measures, the overall small overlap front test rating for the 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class is Marginal. The structure and safety cage performance was rated as Poor, indicating significant intrusion into the driver’s survival space. The lower leg/foot injury measure also received a Poor rating, highlighting potential risks in this area.
Technical measurements from the tests reveal substantial occupant compartment intrusion on the driver’s side. In the second test (CEN1327), the footrest intrusion measured 50 cm, left toepan 29 cm, and brake pedal 22 cm. These measurements indicate a considerable compromise of the footwell area during the crash.
The tests showed that while the frontal and side curtain airbags performed effectively in protecting the head from contacting hard structures in the second test, the extensive footwell intrusion posed a high risk of injury to the lower legs. Notably, 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.
Moderate Overlap Front Crash Test: Original Assessment
In contrast to the small overlap test, the moderate overlap front test involves a larger portion of the vehicle’s front end impacting a deformable barrier. This test is more traditional and represents a significant portion of real-world frontal collisions. The 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class, carrying over the design from the 2010 model year which included a driver’s knee airbag, performed well in this test.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Moderate Overlap Front | Good (G) |
| Overall evaluation | Good (G) |
| Structure and safety cage | Good (G) |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | Good (G) |
| Chest | Good (G) |
| Leg/foot, left | Good (G) |
| Leg/foot, right | Good (G) |
| Driver restraints and dummy kinematics | Good (G) |
The 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class achieved a Good rating in the moderate overlap front test, the highest possible rating. All aspects of the evaluation, including overall evaluation, structure and safety cage, driver injury measures (head/neck, chest, leg/foot), and driver restraints and dummy kinematics, received a Good rating. This demonstrates robust protection in a more common type of frontal crash.
Technical measurements for this test indicate minimal occupant compartment intrusion. Footwell intrusion was minimal, with measurements around 1-2 cm, and instrument panel and steering column movement were also well-controlled. Driver injury measures were low, indicating a low risk of significant injuries in a moderate overlap frontal crash.
Side Impact Crash Test: Original Evaluation
The side impact test assesses the vehicle’s ability to protect occupants in a side collision, a particularly dangerous type of crash due to the reduced space for energy absorption compared to frontal impacts. The 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class, equipped with standard front and rear head curtain airbags and front seat-mounted torso/pelvis airbags, demonstrated excellent performance in the side impact test.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Side Impact | Good (G) |
| Overall evaluation | Good (G) |
| Structure and safety cage | Good (G) |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | Good (G) |
| Torso | Good (G) |
| Pelvis/leg | Good (G) |
| Driver head protection | Good (G) |
| Rear passenger injury measures | |
| Head/neck | Good (G) |
| Torso | Good (G) |
| Pelvis/leg | Good (G) |
| Rear passenger head protection | Good (G) |
The 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class earned a Good rating in the side impact test, reflecting top-tier protection for both driver and rear passengers. All evaluation criteria for both driver and rear passenger injury measures, as well as structural performance and head protection, were rated as Good. This signifies comprehensive side impact protection.
Greasepaint analysis on the dummy heads confirmed that the side airbags effectively protected both the driver and rear passenger’s heads from contacting hard structures during the impact.
Roof Strength Test
Roof strength is a critical factor in rollover crashes. The roof strength test measures how much force a vehicle’s roof can withstand before collapsing, protecting occupants in such events.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Roof Strength | Good (G) |
| Overall evaluation | Good (G) |
The 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class achieved a Good rating in roof strength, indicating a strong roof structure capable of withstanding significant force in a rollover scenario. With a strength-to-weight ratio of 5.36, the roof demonstrated its ability to protect occupants by maintaining the survival space.
Head Restraints and Seats
Head restraints and seats play a crucial role in preventing whiplash injuries in rear-end collisions. The IIHS evaluates these based on dynamic testing and geometric measurements.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Head Restraints & Seats | Good (G) |
| Overall evaluation | Good (G) |
| Dynamic rating | Good (G) |
| Seat/head restraint geometry | Good (G) |
The 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class with power leather seats and Active Head Restraints (AHR) received a Good rating for head restraints and seats. Both dynamic performance and seat/head restraint geometry were rated as Good, signifying effective whiplash protection in rear impacts.
Front Crash Prevention: Vehicle-to-Vehicle
Front crash prevention systems are increasingly important in mitigating or preventing frontal collisions. The 2013-14 Mercedes-Benz C-Class offered an optional Pre-Safe Brake system as part of the Driver Assistance Package.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Front Crash Prevention: Vehicle-to-Vehicle | Superior |
| Overall evaluation | Superior |
| System details | Optional Pre-Safe Brake |
| Package name | Optional Driver Assistance Package |
With the optional Pre-Safe Brake system, the 2013-14 Mercedes-Benz C-Class earned a Superior rating for front crash prevention. This system meets forward collision warning requirements and demonstrated significant impact speed reduction in IIHS tests (10 mph reduction in a 12 mph test and 13 mph reduction in a 25 mph test).
Conclusion
The 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class presents a mixed safety profile based on IIHS crash testing. While it excels in moderate overlap front, side impact, roof strength, and head restraint tests, achieving Good ratings, its performance in the small overlap front test is Marginal with a Poor structural rating. However, with the optional Pre-Safe Brake system, it achieves a Superior rating for front crash prevention.
For prospective buyers of a 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class, understanding these safety ratings is crucial. The vehicle offers strong protection in many common crash scenarios, but the marginal performance in the small overlap front test should be considered, especially for driver-side impacts. The availability of the optional Pre-Safe Brake system adds a significant layer of preventative safety. Overall, the 2013 Mercedes-Benz C-Class provides a generally high level of safety, consistent with its luxury vehicle status, but with specific areas for potential improvement in small overlap frontal crashes.
