The 2016 Mercedes-Benz C-Class marked a redesign year, introducing advanced safety features and improved structural integrity. This article delves into a detailed analysis of the safety ratings and crash test performance of the Mercedes-Benz C 2016 model, providing a comprehensive overview for prospective buyers and automotive enthusiasts interested in vehicle safety. We will explore the results from rigorous evaluations, including small overlap front, moderate overlap front, side impact, roof strength, head restraints, headlights, front crash prevention, and child seat anchor tests.
Small Overlap Front Crash Test: Driver-Side Assessment
The small overlap front crash test simulates a collision where only a small portion of the vehicle’s front end impacts a barrier. This is a particularly challenging test that assesses how well the car’s structure holds up in an offset impact.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Structure and safety cage | G (Good) |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | G (Good) |
| Chest | G (Good) |
| Hip/thigh | G (Good) |
| Lower leg/foot | G (Good) |
| Driver restraints and dummy kinematics | A (Acceptable) |
The Mercedes-Benz C 2016 achieved a “Good” rating in the crucial “Structure and safety cage” category, indicating that the structural integrity of the vehicle was maintained during the small overlap crash. All driver injury measures also received “Good” ratings, demonstrating effective protection for the head, neck, chest, hip, thigh, lower leg, and foot.
Action shot of the Mercedes-Benz C 2016 during the small overlap frontal crash test, highlighting the vehicle’s structural response.
However, the “Driver restraints and dummy kinematics” were rated as “Acceptable.” The test revealed that while the dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag, it rolled to the left due to excessive forward movement allowed by the seat belt. Despite this, the side curtain airbag deployed effectively, offering sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from side structure and external objects.
Post-crash dummy position within the Mercedes-Benz C 2016, illustrating the maintained driver survival space relative to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel.
Deployment of airbags during the small overlap frontal crash test of the Mercedes-Benz C 2016, showing head contact with the frontal airbag and partial roll to the left.
Driver’s space integrity in the Mercedes-Benz C 2016 after the small overlap frontal crash, indicating low risk of leg and foot injuries for the driver.
Technical Measurements – Small Overlap Front Test
| Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Lower hinge pillar max (cm) | 5 |
| Footrest (cm) | 10 |
| Left toepan (cm) | 5 |
| Brake pedal (cm) | 8 |
| Rocker panel lateral average (cm) | 2 |
| Steering column | 1 |
| Upper hinge pillar max (cm) | 4 |
| Upper dash (cm) | 4 |
| Lower instrument panel (cm) | 4 |
| Driver injury measures | Measurement |
|---|---|
| HIC-15 (Head Injury Criterion) | 161 |
| Neck Tension (kN) | 1.0 |
| Neck Extension bending moment (Nm) | 5 |
| Maximum Nij (Neck Injury Criteria) | 0.20 |
| Chest maximum compression (mm) | 21 |
| Femur – Left (kN) | 1.2 |
| Femur – Right (kN) | 1.3 |
| Knee displacement – Left (mm) | 3 |
| Knee displacement – Right (mm) | 5 |
| Maximum tibia index – Left | 0.50 |
| Maximum tibia index – Right | 0.43 |
| Tibia axial force – Left (kN) | 2.8 |
| Tibia axial force – Right (kN) | 2.4 |
| Foot acceleration – Left (g) | 80 |
| Foot acceleration – Right (g) | 73 |
Moderate Overlap Front Crash Test: Original Assessment
The moderate overlap front test involves 40% of the vehicle’s front width impacting a deformable barrier. This test is designed to evaluate the vehicle’s performance in a more common type of frontal collision.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall evaluation | G (Good) |
| Structure and safety cage | G (Good) |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | G (Good) |
| Chest | G (Good) |
| Leg/foot, left | G (Good) |
| Leg/foot, right | G (Good) |
| Driver restraints and dummy kinematics | G (Good) |
The Mercedes-Benz C 2016 earned a “Good” rating in all categories for the moderate overlap front test. This included overall evaluation, structure and safety cage, driver injury measures for head/neck, chest, and legs/feet, and driver restraints and dummy kinematics.
Technical Measurements – Moderate Overlap Front Test
| Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Footrest (cm) | 1 |
| Left Footwell (cm) | 1 |
| Center Footwell (cm) | 1 |
| Right Footwell (cm) | 1 |
| Brake pedal (cm) | 2 |
| Left Instrument panel rearward movement (cm) | 0 |
| Right Instrument panel rearward movement (cm) | 0 |
| Steering column upward movement (cm) | 3 |
| Steering column rearward movement (cm) | -7 |
| A-pillar rearward movement (cm) | 0 |
| Driver injury measures | Measurement |
|---|---|
| HIC-15 (Head Injury Criterion) | 148 |
| Peak gs at hard contact (Head) | 16 |
| Neck Tension (kN) | 1.1 |
| Neck Extension bending moment (Nm) | 11 |
| Maximum Nij (Neck Injury Criteria) | 0.20 |
| Chest maximum compression (mm) | 22 |
| 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 – Left (g) | 36 |
| Foot acceleration – Right (g) | 53 |
Side Impact Crash Test: Original Assessment
The side impact test simulates a perpendicular collision from the side, assessing the vehicle’s ability to protect occupants in side crashes. The tested vehicle was a 2015 Mercedes-Benz C 400 4-door 4wd, equipped with standard front and rear head curtain airbags and front seat-mounted torso airbags.
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall evaluation | G (Good) |
| Structure and safety cage | G (Good) |
| Driver injury measures | |
| Head/neck | G (Good) |
| Torso | G (Good) |
| Pelvis/leg | G (Good) |
| Driver head protection | G (Good) |
| Rear passenger injury measures | |
| Head/neck | G (Good) |
| Torso | G (Good) |
| Pelvis/leg | G (Good) |
| Rear passenger head protection | G (Good) |
The Mercedes-Benz C 2016 demonstrated excellent side impact protection, achieving “Good” ratings across all categories for both driver and rear passenger injury measures, as well as structural integrity and head protection.
Technical Measurements – Side Impact Test
| Measures of occupant compartment intrusion on driver side | Measurement |
|---|---|
| B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver’s seat (cm) | -20.5 |
| Driver injury measures | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head HIC-15 | 228 |
| Neck Tension (kN) | 1.0 |
| Neck Compression (kN) | 0.3 |
| Shoulder Lateral deflection (mm) | 40 |
| Shoulder Lateral force (kN) | 1.2 |
| Torso Maximum deflection (mm) | 35 |
| Torso Average deflection (mm) | 32 |
| Torso Maximum deflection rate (m/s) | 4.56 |
| Torso Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) | 0.51 |
| Pelvis Iliac force (kN) | 2.4 |
| Pelvis Acetabulum force (kN) | 1.2 |
| Pelvis Combined force (kN) | 3.6 |
| Left femur L-M force (kN) | 0.4 |
| Left femur L-M moment (Nm) | 36 |
| Left femur A-P moment (Nm) | 74 |
| Passenger injury measures | Measurement |
|---|---|
| Head HIC-15 | 225 |
| Neck Tension (kN) | 0.7 |
| Neck Compression (kN) | 0.1 |
| Shoulder Lateral deflection (mm) | 34 |
| Shoulder Lateral force (kN) | 1.1 |
| Torso Maximum deflection (mm) | 22 |
| Torso Average deflection (mm) | 18 |
| Torso Maximum deflection rate (m/s) | 1.94 |
| Torso Maximum viscous criterion (m/s) | 0.19 |
| Pelvis Iliac force (kN) | 2.4 |
| Pelvis Acetabulum force (kN) | 2.0 |
| Pelvis Combined force (kN) | 4.2 |
| Left femur L-M force (kN) | 0.5 |
| Left femur L-M moment (Nm) | 33 |
| Left femur A-P moment (Nm) | 51 |
Roof Strength Test
The roof strength test measures the roof’s ability to withstand forces in a rollover accident, crucial for occupant protection.
| Overall evaluation | G (Good) |
|---|---|
| Curb weight | 3,522 lbs |
| Peak force | 24,642 lbs |
| Strength-to-weight ratio | 7.00 |
The Mercedes-Benz C 2016 achieved a “Good” rating in roof strength, with an impressive strength-to-weight ratio of 7.00, significantly exceeding the minimum requirement.
Head Restraints & Seats Evaluation
This evaluation assesses the effectiveness of the head restraints and seats in preventing whiplash injuries in rear-end collisions.
| Overall evaluation | G (Good) |
|---|---|
| Dynamic rating | G (Good) |
| Seat/head restraint geometry | G (Good) |
The Mercedes-Benz C 2016 received a “Good” rating for head restraints and seats, both in dynamic performance and geometry, indicating effective whiplash protection.
Technical Measurements – Head Restraints & Seats
| Seat type | Power leather seat |
|---|---|
| Backset (mm) | 38 |
| Distance below top of head (mm) | -14 |
| Max T1 acceleration (g) | 16.1 |
| Head contact time (ms) | 57 |
| Force rating | 1 |
| Max neck shear force (N) | 21 |
| Max neck tension (N) | 464 |
Headlight Performance: A Mixed Bag
Headlight performance is critical for nighttime driving safety. The Mercedes-Benz C 2016 was evaluated with three different headlight variations, and all received a “Poor” overall rating.
Trim Level: C 300 with Lighting package (LED Projector)
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall rating | P (Poor) |
| Low-beam headlight type | LED projector |
| High-beam headlight type | LED projector |
| Curve-adaptive? | Yes |
| High-beam assist? | Yes |
The LED projector headlights, even with curve-adaptive and high-beam assist features, were rated “Poor” due to inadequate visibility in various driving scenarios, particularly on curves and on the left side of the road in low beam mode. They also produced some glare.
Trim Level: C 300 with Premium 2 package (LED Projector/Reflector)
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall rating | P (Poor) |
| Low-beam headlight type | LED projector |
| High-beam headlight type | LED reflector |
| Curve-adaptive? | No |
| High-beam assist? | No |
This configuration, featuring LED projector low beams and LED reflector high beams without curve-adaptive or high-beam assist, also received a “Poor” rating. Low beam visibility was inadequate on the left side and on curves, while high beams were inadequate on curves. Glare was not an issue with this setup.
Trim Level: C 300 (Halogen Reflector)
| Evaluation criteria | Rating |
|---|---|
| Overall rating | P (Poor) |
| Low-beam headlight type | Halogen reflector |
| High-beam headlight type | Halogen reflector |
| Curve-adaptive? | No |
| High-beam assist? | No |
The base halogen reflector headlights also received a “Poor” rating. Low beam visibility was inadequate across the board, and high beams were inadequate on curves. Glare was not detected.
Front Crash Prevention: Vehicle-to-Vehicle
Front crash prevention systems are designed to mitigate or prevent frontal collisions. The Mercedes-Benz C 2016 offers two front crash prevention system variations.
Optional Pre-Safe Brake (Superior Rating)
| Overall evaluation | Superior |
|---|
When equipped with the optional Pre-Safe Brake system, the Mercedes-Benz C 2016 achieved a “Superior” rating. This system meets forward collision warning requirements and successfully avoided collisions in both 12 mph and 25 mph tests.
Standard Collision Prevention Assist Plus (Advanced Rating)
| Overall evaluation | Advanced |
|---|
The standard Collision Prevention Assist Plus system earned an “Advanced” rating. While it avoided 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)
Child seat anchors (LATCH) are evaluated for their ease of use and effectiveness in securing child seats.
| Overall evaluation | G (Good) |
|---|
The Mercedes-Benz C 2016 received a “Good” rating for child seat anchors. It features two rear seating positions with complete LATCH hardware and an additional position with only a tether anchor.
Details by Seating Position
| Position | Rating | Details |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Good | Tether anchor (easy-to-find), Lower anchors (easy to access) |
| 2 | Good | Tether anchor (easy-to-find), No lower anchors available |
| 3 | Good | Tether anchor (easy-to-find), Lower anchors (easy to access) |
Conclusion: A Safe Vehicle with Headlight Limitations
The Mercedes-Benz C 2016 demonstrates robust safety performance across most crash tests, earning “Good” ratings in key areas such as structural integrity, occupant protection in frontal and side impacts, roof strength, and head restraints. Its front crash prevention systems also offer significant safety enhancements. However, the “Poor” rating for all headlight variations is a notable drawback. Prospective buyers should be aware of this limitation, especially if nighttime driving is a frequent occurrence. Overall, the Mercedes-Benz C 2016 remains a safe vehicle choice, particularly excelling in crashworthiness, but headlight performance should be considered.
