The 2018 Mercedes-Benz GLC continues the legacy of its predecessor, the GLK, offering a blend of luxury and practicality in a compact SUV form. For prospective buyers and current owners alike, understanding the safety performance of the GLC is paramount. This article delves into the comprehensive safety ratings of the 2018 Mercedes-Benz GLC, providing an in-depth analysis based on rigorous testing standards. We will explore various crashworthiness evaluations, headlight assessments, and front crash prevention systems to give you a complete picture of the safety features and performance of the Benz 2018 Glc.
Small Overlap Front: Driver-Side Evaluation
The small overlap front crash test is designed to simulate what happens when the front corner of a vehicle collides with another vehicle or a stationary object like a tree or pole. This test is particularly demanding because it bypasses the main energy-absorbing structures of the vehicle.
The 2017 Mercedes-Benz GLC 300 4-door 4wd model was tested for the driver-side small overlap front impact. The results for the benz 2018 glc model, which falls under the 2016-22 model year rating, are directly applicable.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall | Good (G) |
| Structure and safety cage | Good (G) |
| Driver Injury Measures: | |
| Head/Neck | Good (G) |
| Chest | Good (G) |
| Hip/Thigh | Good (G) |
| Lower Leg/Foot | Good (G) |
| Driver Restraints and Dummy Kinematics | Acceptable (A) |
Despite achieving ‘Good’ ratings across most driver injury measures and structural integrity, the driver restraints and dummy kinematics were rated as ‘Acceptable’. The test indicated that while the dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag, it unfortunately rolled to the left. This occurred because the seat belt allowed excessive forward movement of the head and torso. However, the side curtain airbag deployed effectively, offering sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from impacting side structures or external objects.
Technical measurements from the test provide further details:
Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Lower occupant compartment | |
| Lower hinge pillar max (cm) | 1 |
| Footrest (cm) | 10 |
| Left toepan (cm) | 7 |
| Brake pedal (cm) | 3 |
| Rocker panel lateral average (cm) | 1 |
| Upper occupant compartment | |
| Steering column | 0 |
| Upper hinge pillar max (cm) | 1 |
| Upper dash (cm) | 2 |
| Lower instrument panel (cm) | 2 |
Driver injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 224 |
| Peak gs at hard contact | no contact |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 1.2 |
| Extension bending moment (Nm) | 10 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.22 |
| Chest maximum compression (mm) | 23 |
| Femur (kN) | |
| Left | 1.1 |
| Right | 1.0 |
| Knee displacement (mm) | |
| Left | 2 |
| Right | 3 |
| Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%) | |
| Left | 0 |
| Right | 0 |
| Maximum tibia index | |
| Left | 0.64 |
| Right | 0.41 |
| Tibia axial force (kN) | |
| Left | 3.0 |
| Right | 1.8 |
| Foot acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 86 |
| Right | 61 |
About the small overlap front test
Small Overlap Front: Passenger-Side Evaluation
Recognizing that passenger safety is equally crucial, the passenger-side small overlap front test evaluates the vehicle’s ability to protect the front passenger in a similar frontal collision scenario. For the benz 2018 glc, two passenger-side small overlap frontal tests were conducted on a 2018 model, ensuring a robust assessment.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall evaluation | Good (G) |
| Structure and safety cage | Good (G) |
| Passenger Injury Measures: | |
| Head/Neck | Good (G) |
| Chest | Good (G) |
| Hip/Thigh | Good (G) |
| Lower Leg/Foot | Good (G) |
| Passenger Restraints and Dummy Kinematics | Good (G) |
| Driver Injury Measures: | |
| Head/Neck | Good (G) |
| Chest | Good (G) |
| Hip/Thigh | Good (G) |
| Lower Leg/Foot | Good (G) |
| Driver Restraints and Dummy Kinematics | Good (G) |
The benz 2018 glc achieved a ‘Good’ rating in all aspects of the passenger-side small overlap test. Both passenger and driver injury measures were well-controlled, and the restraint systems performed admirably. The structural integrity of the safety cage was maintained, ensuring occupant survival space.
Technical measurements from both tests (CEP1712 and VTP1702) are provided below:
Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on passenger side
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Test ID | CEP1712 |
| Lower occupant compartment | |
| Lower hinge pillar max (cm) | 2 |
| Footrest (cm) | 16 |
| Right toepan (cm) | 8 |
| Center toepan (cm) | 4 |
| Rocker panel lateral average (cm) | 0 |
| Upper occupant compartment | |
| Center dash (cm) | 1 |
| Upper hinge pillar max (cm) | 2 |
| Upper dash (cm) | 4 |
| Right lower dash (cm) | 4 |
Passenger injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Test ID | CEP1712 |
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 122 |
| Peak gs at hard contact | no contact |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 0.7 |
| Extension bending moment (Nm) | 17 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.20 |
| Chest maximum compression (mm) | 18 |
| Femur (kN) | |
| Left | 0.1 |
| Right | 1.2 |
| Knee displacement (mm) | |
| Left | 1 |
| Right | 0 |
| Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%) | |
| Left | 0 |
| Right | 0 |
| Maximum tibia index | |
| Left | 0.21 |
| Right | 0.81 |
| Tibia axial force (kN) | |
| Left | 1.1 |
| Right | 4.7 |
| Foot acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 68 |
| Right | 109 |
Driver injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Test ID | CEP1712 |
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 105 |
| Peak gs at hard contact | no contact |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 0.7 |
| Extension bending moment (Nm) | 7 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.12 |
| Chest maximum compression (mm) | 21 |
| Femur (kN) | |
| Left | 0.6 |
| Right | 0.9 |
| Knee displacement (mm) | |
| Left | 2 |
| Right | 3 |
| Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%) | |
| Left | 0 |
| Right | 0 |
| Maximum tibia index | |
| Left | 0.18 |
| Right | 0.49 |
| Tibia axial force (kN) | |
| Left | 0.4 |
| Right | 0.7 |
| Foot acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 23 |
| Right | 47 |
About the small overlap front test
Moderate Overlap Front: Original Test
The moderate overlap front test simulates a head-on collision between two vehicles of similar weight, both traveling at approximately 40 mph, but in this test, 40% of the width of the car is overlapped. This is a common type of accident, and the benz 2018 glc‘s performance here is crucial.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| 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 benz 2018 glc received a ‘Good’ rating in the moderate overlap front test. All injury measures were well within acceptable limits, indicating a low risk of significant injuries in this type of collision. The structural design effectively protected the occupant space.
Technical measurements from the moderate overlap test:
Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Footwell intrusion | |
| Footrest (cm) | 1 |
| Left (cm) | 1 |
| Center (cm) | 0 |
| Right (cm) | 0 |
| Brake pedal (cm) | 1 |
| Instrument panel rearward movement | |
| Left (cm) | 0 |
| Right (cm) | -1 |
| Steering column movement | |
| Upward (cm) | -2 |
| Rearward (cm) | -7 |
| A-pillar rearward movement (cm) | 0 |
Driver injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head | |
| HIC-15 | 131 |
| Peak gs at hard contact | no contact |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 1.1 |
| Extension bending moment (Nm) | 13 |
| Maximum Nij | 0.21 |
| Chest maximum compression (mm) | 25 |
| Legs | |
| Femur force – left (kN) | 0.8 |
| Femur force – right (kN) | 0.7 |
| Knee displacement – left (mm) | 1 |
| Knee displacement – right (mm) | 2 |
| Maximum tibia index – left | 0.17 |
| Maximum tibia index – right | 0.27 |
| Tibia axial force – left (kN) | 1.9 |
| Tibia axial force – right (kN) | 2.8 |
| Foot acceleration (g) | |
| Left | 45 |
| Right | 68 |
About the original moderate overlap front test
Side: Original Test
Side impacts are another significant source of injuries in vehicle accidents. The side crash test evaluates how well a vehicle protects occupants in a side collision, simulating a vehicle being struck by another vehicle.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| 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 benz 2018 glc once again demonstrated ‘Good’ performance in the side crash test. Both driver and rear passenger injury measures were rated ‘Good’, indicating excellent protection in side impact scenarios. The vehicle’s structure and side airbags worked effectively to minimize injury risk.
Technical measurements for the side impact test are detailed below:
Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side
| Test ID | VTS1625 |
|---|---|
| B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver’s seat (cm) | -24.0 |
Driver injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head HIC-15 | 133 |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 1.0 |
| Compression (kN) | 0.3 |
| Shoulder | |
| Lateral deflection (mm) | 25 |
| Lateral force (kN) | 1.0 |
| Torso | |
| Maximum deflection (mm) | 32 |
| Average deflection (mm) | 29 |
| Maximum deflection rate (m/s) | 3.44 |
| Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) | 0.53 |
| Pelvis | |
| Iliac force (kN) | 1.1 |
| Acetabulum force (kN) | 1.1 |
| Combined force (kN) | 2.2 |
| Left femur | |
| L-M force (kN) | 0.6 |
| L-M moment (Nm) | 41 |
| A-P moment (Nm) | 46 |
Passenger injury measures
| Evaluation criteria | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head HIC-15 | 137 |
| Neck | |
| Tension (kN) | 0.4 |
| Compression (kN) | 0.6 |
| Shoulder | |
| Lateral deflection (mm) | 38 |
| Lateral force (kN) | 1.1 |
| Torso | |
| Maximum deflection (mm) | 36 |
| Average deflection (mm) | 16 |
| Maximum deflection rate (m/s) | 3.39 |
| Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) | 0.43 |
| Pelvis | |
| Iliac force (kN) | 0.1 |
| Acetabulum force (kN) | 1.9 |
| Combined force (kN) | 1.9 |
| Left femur | |
| L-M force (kN) | 0.4 |
| L-M moment (Nm) | 46 |
| A-P moment (Nm) | 50 |
About the original side crash test
Roof Strength
Roof strength is critical in rollover accidents. The roof strength test measures how much force a roof can withstand before collapsing, protecting occupants in such events.
| Overall evaluation | Good (G) |
|---|---|
| Curb weight | 4,026 lbs |
| Peak force | 24,311 lbs |
| Strength-to-weight ratio | 6.04 |
The benz 2018 glc achieved a ‘Good’ rating for roof strength. With a strength-to-weight ratio of 6.04, the roof can withstand over six times the vehicle’s weight, offering substantial protection in rollover scenarios.
Head Restraints & Seats
Head restraints and seats play a vital role in preventing neck injuries, particularly in rear-end collisions.
| Overall evaluation | Good (G) |
|---|---|
| Dynamic rating | Good (G) |
| Seat/head restraint geometry | Good (G) |
The benz 2018 glc‘s head restraints and seats earned a ‘Good’ overall rating. Both dynamic performance and seat/head restraint geometry were rated ‘Good’, indicating effective design to minimize whiplash and related injuries in rear impacts.
Technical measurements for head restraints & seats:
| 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 |
About the head restraint & seat test
Headlights
Visibility is crucial for accident prevention, and headlight performance is a key factor in nighttime safety. The IIHS evaluates headlight systems based on illumination and glare. The benz 2018 glc has been tested with three different headlight variations.
Trim level: GLC 300 trim equipped with Advanced Lighting package
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall rating | Good (G) |
| Low-beam headlight type | LED projector |
| High-beam headlight type | LED projector |
| Curve-adaptive? | Yes |
| High-beam assist? | Yes |
The GLC 300 trim with the Advanced Lighting package achieved a ‘Good’ overall rating for its headlights. Both low and high beams provide good visibility on straightaways and curves, with high-beam assist compensating for any low-beam limitations on curves.
Trim level: GLC 300 trim equipped with LED Headlamps and Taillamps package
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall rating | Acceptable (A) |
| Low-beam headlight type | LED projector |
| High-beam headlight type | LED reflector |
| Curve-adaptive? | No |
| High-beam assist? | No |
The GLC 300 trim with the LED Headlamps and Taillamps package received an ‘Acceptable’ rating. While low beams offer good to fair visibility, and high beams are good on straightaways, performance on curves is only fair, without curve-adaptive features or high-beam assist.
Trim level: GLC 300 trim (Standard)
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall rating | Marginal (M) |
| Low-beam headlight type | Halogen reflector |
| High-beam headlight type | Halogen reflector |
| Curve-adaptive? | No |
| High-beam assist? | No |
The standard GLC 300 trim with halogen headlights received a ‘Marginal’ rating. Low beams provide fair to inadequate visibility on curves, and high beams are inadequate on left curves, highlighting the significant difference in performance compared to the LED options.
About the headlight evaluation
Front Crash Prevention: Vehicle-to-Vehicle
Front crash prevention systems are designed to mitigate or avoid frontal collisions. The IIHS tests vehicle-to-vehicle front crash prevention systems at 12 mph and 25 mph. The benz 2018 glc has two system variations.
System details: Optional Pre-Safe Brake with Pedestrian Recognition
| Overall evaluation | Superior |
|---|---|
| Forward Collision Warning | Meets requirements |
| 12 mph test | Collision Avoided |
| 25 mph test | Collision Avoided |
With the optional Pre-Safe Brake system, the benz 2018 glc earns a ‘Superior’ rating. The system successfully avoided collisions in both 12 mph and 25 mph tests and meets forward collision warning criteria.
System details: Standard Collision Prevention Assist Plus
| Overall evaluation | Superior |
|---|---|
| Forward Collision Warning | Does not meet requirements |
| 12 mph test | Collision Avoided |
| 25 mph test | Collision Avoided |
Even with the standard Collision Prevention Assist Plus, the benz 2018 glc achieves a ‘Superior’ rating in vehicle-to-vehicle front crash prevention. While the standard system doesn’t meet forward collision warning requirements, it still successfully avoided collisions in both test speeds.
About the original front crash prevention test
Child Seat Anchors (LATCH)
Child seat anchors, or LATCH (Lower Anchors and Tethers for Children), are evaluated for their ease of use.
| Overall evaluation | Acceptable (A) |
|---|---|
| Vehicle trim | GLC 300 |
| Seat type | leatherette |
The benz 2018 glc received an ‘Acceptable’ rating for child seat anchors. It has two rear seating positions with complete LATCH hardware and an additional position with only a tether anchor. While functional, the system was noted as being difficult to maneuver around the anchors in certain positions.
Details by seating position
| Position | Rating |
|---|---|
| 1 | Acceptable (A) |
| Tether anchor | Easy-to-find |
| Lower anchors | Not too deep, but difficult to maneuver around |
| 2 | Not Rated |
| Tether anchor | Easy-to-find |
| Lower anchors | None available |
| 3 | Acceptable (A) |
| Tether anchor | Easy-to-find |
| Lower anchors | Not too deep, but difficult to maneuver around |
About the child seat anchor evaluation
Conclusion
The 2018 Mercedes-Benz GLC demonstrates robust safety performance across a range of crash tests and safety system evaluations. It achieves ‘Good’ ratings in most crashworthiness categories, reflecting a strong structural design and effective occupant protection. While the driver-side small overlap test revealed an ‘Acceptable’ rating for restraints due to dummy head movement, the overall safety profile of the benz 2018 glc is commendable. Features like optional advanced headlights and superior front crash prevention systems further enhance its safety appeal. For families and individuals prioritizing safety in a luxury SUV, the 2018 Mercedes-Benz GLC stands out as a strong contender.
