Top Safety Pick

2022 Mercedes-Benz GLC

midsize luxury SUV / 4-door SUV

Award applies only to vehicles with optional front crash prevention and specific headlights

Crashworthiness

Rating overview
Evaluation criteria	Rating
Small overlap front: driver-side
Small overlap front: passenger-side
Moderate overlap front: original test
Side: original test
Roof strength
Head restraints & seats

Crash avoidance & mitigation

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Headlights (varies by trim/option)
Front crash prevention: vehicle-to-vehicle
Optional system	Superior
Front crash prevention: pedestrian (day)
Optional system	Superior

Seat belts & child restraints

Evaluation criteria	Rating
LATCH ease of use

Other available safety features

Standard blind spot detection
Optional lane departure warning
Optional lane departure prevention
Standard rear automatic braking

Key

G
Good
A
Acceptable
M
Marginal
P
Poor

Superior
Advanced
Basic

Some ratings use a scale of Poor to Good. Others range from Basic to Superior.

Small overlap front: driver-side

Rating applies to 2016-22 models

Tested vehicle: 2017 Mercedes-Benz GLC 300 4-door 4wd

The Mercedes-Benz GLC was introduced in the 2016 model year as a replacement for the Mercedes-Benz GLK.

Evaluation criteria	Rating

Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics The dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag but rolled to the left because the seat belt allowed excessive forward excursion of the head and torso. The side curtain airbag deployed and has sufficient forward coverage to protect the head from contact with side structure and outside objects.

Action shot taken during the driver-side small overlap frontal crash test.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame, steering wheel, and instrument panel after the crash test indicates that the driver's survival space was maintained well.

The dummy’s head contacted the frontal airbag but rolled around the left side, allowing the head to move toward the gap in coverage between the frontal and side curtain airbags.

The driver's space was maintained well, and risk of injuries to the dummy's legs and feet was low.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN1722
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	1
Footrest (cm)	10
Left toepan (cm)	7
Brake pedal (cm)	3
Parking brake (cm)
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

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEN1722
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

Rating applies to 2016-22 models

Tested vehicle: 2018 Mercedes-Benz GLC 300 4-door 4wd

The Mercedes-Benz GLC was introduced in the 2016 model year as a replacement for the Mercedes-Benz GLK. Two passenger-side small overlap frontal tests of a 2018 model GLC were conducted, one by the Institute and the other by Mercedes-Benz. Ratings are based on both tests.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Passenger injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Passenger restraints and dummy kinematics
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Hip/thigh
Lower leg/foot
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics

Action shot taken during the Institute's passenger-side small overlap frontal crash test.

The dummy's position in relation to the door frame and dashboard after the crash test indicates that the passenger's survival space was maintained well (Institute test car shown).

The frontal and side curtain airbags worked well together to keep the head from coming close to any stiff structure or outside objects that could cause injury (Institute test shown).

The passenger's space was maintained well in both tests, but forces on the right lower leg were just high enough to indicate the possibility of injuries in the Institute's test. In the test conducted by Mercedes-Benz, injury risk to both legs and feet was low.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEP1712	VTP1702
Lower occupant compartment
Lower hinge pillar max (cm)	2	2
Footrest (cm)	16	8
Right toepan (cm)	8	3
Center toepan (cm)	4	3
Rocker panel lateral average (cm)	0	0
Upper occupant compartment
Center dash (cm)	1	1
Upper hinge pillar max (cm)	2	3
Upper dash (cm)	4	3
Right lower dash (cm)	4	4

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEP1712	VTP1702
Head
HIC-15	122	53
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.7	0.9
Extension bending moment (Nm)	17	11
Maximum Nij	0.20	0.20
Chest maximum compression (mm)	18	19
Femur (kN)
Left	0.1	0.0
Right	1.2	0.0
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	1	1
Right	0	1
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0	0
Right	0	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.21	0.17
Right	0.81	0.15
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	1.1	0.2
Right	4.7	0.5
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	68	41
Right	109	60

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	CEP1712	VTP1702
Head
HIC-15	105	42
Peak gs at hard contact	no contact	no contact
Neck
Tension (kN)	0.7	0.8
Extension bending moment (Nm)	7	4
Maximum Nij	0.12	0.20
Chest maximum compression (mm)	21	18
Femur (kN)
Left	0.6	0.6
Right	0.9	1.1
Knee displacement (mm)
Left	2	1
Right	3	3
Knee-thigh-hip injury risk (%)
Left	0	0
Right	0	0
Maximum tibia index
Left	0.18	0.27
Right	0.49	0.26
Tibia axial force (kN)
Left	0.4	0.2
Right	0.7	1.5
Foot acceleration (g)
Left	23	25
Right	47	53

About the small overlap front test

Moderate overlap front: original test

Rating applies to 2016-22 models

Tested vehicle: 2016 Mercedes-Benz GLC 300 4-door 4wd

The Mercedes-Benz GLC was introduced in the 2016 model year as a replacement for the Mercedes-Benz GLK. Moderate overlap frontal ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test conducted by Mercedes-Benz.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Chest
Leg/foot, left
Leg/foot, right
Driver restraints and dummy kinematics

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTF1626
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

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTF1626
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

Rating applies to 2016-22 models

Tested vehicle: 2016 Mercedes-Benz GLC 300 4-door 4wd

The Mercedes-Benz GLC was introduced in the 2016 model year as a replacement for the Mercedes-Benz GLK. Side ratings are assigned by the Institute based on a test conducted by Mercedes-Benz.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Structure and safety cage
Driver injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis/leg
Driver head protection
Rear passenger injury measures
Head/neck
Torso
Pelvis/leg
Rear passenger head protection

Technical measurements for this test

Test ID	VTS1625
B-pillar to longitudinal centerline of driver's seat (cm)	-24.0
Negative numbers indicate the amount by which the crush stopped short of the seat centerline.

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS1625
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

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Test ID	VTS1625
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

Rating applies to 2016-22 models

Tested vehicle: 2017 Mercedes-Benz GLC 300 4-door 4wd

Overall evaluation
Curb weight	4,026 lbs
Peak force	24,311 lbs
Strength-to-weight ratio	6.04

About the roof strength test

Head restraints & seats

Seat type: Power leather seat

Overall evaluation
Dynamic rating
Seat/head restraint geometry

Technical measurements for this test

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
Currently, IIHS tests apply only to front seats.

Headlights

Ratings are given for 2 different headlight variations available on this vehicle.

Trim level(s)

All trims equipped with Exterior Lighting package

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Low-beam headlight type	LED projector
High-beam headlight type	LED projector
Curve-adaptive?	Yes
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on the left side of the road and fair on the right side. On curves, visibility was good on the sharp left and both right curves and fair on the gradual left curve.

The low beams never exceeded glare limits.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was good in all 4 tests.

High-beam assist compensates for some limitations of this vehicle's low beams on the straightaway and on the gradual left curve.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	All trims equipped with Exterior Lighting package
Low-beam headlight type	LED projector
High-beam headlight type	LED projector
Curve-adaptive?	Yes
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating Applies to 2020-22 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	85.0 m	None
Straightaway left edge	71.3 m	None
250m radius right curve, right edge	79.2 m	None
250m radius left curve, left edge	64.4 m	None
150m radius right curve, right edge	70.0 m	None
150m radius left curve, left edge	60.9 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	147.8 m
Straightaway left edge	154.5 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	91.7 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	91.0 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	74.2 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	72.2 m

Trim level(s)

All trims

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Low-beam headlight type	LED reflector
High-beam headlight type	LED reflector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating
Distance at which headlights provide at least 5 lux illumination:

Low beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on both sides of the road. On curves, visibility was good on the gradual right curve and fair on the sharp right and both left curves.

The low beams created excessive glare.

High beams
On the straightaway, visibility was good on the right side of the road and inadequate on the left side. On curves, visibility was good on the gradual right curve, fair on the gradual left and sharp right curves, and inadequate on the sharp left curve.

High-beam assist compensates for some limitations of this vehicle's low beams on both left curves and on both right curves.

Technical measurements for this test

Evaluation criteria	Measurement
Trim level(s)	All trims
Low-beam headlight type	LED reflector
High-beam headlight type	LED reflector
Curve-adaptive?	No
High-beam assist?	Yes
Overall rating Applies to 2022 models

LOW BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)	Amount glare exceeded threshold
Straightaway right edge	116.2 m	86.9%
Straightaway left edge	68.0 m	86.9%
250m radius right curve, right edge	68.6 m	11.0%
250m radius left curve, left edge	63.5 m	12.9%
150m radius right curve, right edge	52.2 m	3.8%
150m radius left curve, left edge	47.3 m	None

HIGH BEAMS	Average minimum useful illumination distance (5 lux)
Straightaway right edge	187.9 m
Straightaway left edge	125.2 m
250m radius right curve, right edge	78.1 m
250m radius left curve, left edge	70.6 m
150m radius right curve, right edge	57.7 m
150m radius left curve, left edge	52.3 m

About the headlight evaluation

Front crash prevention: vehicle-to-vehicle

System details

Optional Active Brake Assist with Cross-Traffic Function

Package name

Optional Driver Assistance Package

Overall evaluation

Applies to 2020-22 models

Superior

with optional equipment

This system meets the requirements for forward collision warning.
In the 12 mph test, this vehicle avoided a collision.
In the 25 mph test, impact speed was reduced by 22 mph.

About the original front crash prevention test

Front crash prevention: pedestrian (day)

System details

optional Active Brake Assist with Cross-Traffic Function

Overall evaluation

This rating applies to all 2020-22 models equipped with Driver Assistance package

Superior

with optional equipment

Crossing child

In the 12 mph test, this vehicle avoided a collision.
In the 25 mph test, impact speed was reduced by 23 mph.

Crossing adult

In the 12 mph test, this vehicle avoided a collision.
In the 25 mph test, impact speed was reduced by 22 mph.

Parallel adult

In the 25 mph test, this vehicle avoided a collision.
In the 37 mph test, impact speed was reduced by 30 mph. A warning was issued 2.1 seconds before impact.

About the pedestrian front crash prevention test

Child seat anchors

Rating applies to 2016-22 models

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim	GLC 300
Seat type	leatherette

This vehicle has 2 rear seating positions with complete child seat attachment (LATCH) hardware.

It has 1 additional seating position with a tether anchor only.

Evaluation criteria	Rating
Overall evaluation
Vehicle trim	GLC 300
Seat type	leatherette

Rating icon	Rating
G	Good
A	Acceptable
M	Marginal
P	Poor
	Seating positions that rely on borrowed lower anchors or have only a tether anchor available are not rated.
thether anchor symbol	Tether anchor
lower anchor symbol	Lower anchors
shared lower achors symbol	Lower anchor(s) can be borrowed from adjacent positions(s)
	No hardware available

Details by seating position

Position	Rating
1
1	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	not too deep in seat
	not too much force needed to attach
	difficult to maneuver around anchors
2
2	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	none available
3
3	Tether anchor
	easy-to-find location
	no other hardware could be confused for anchor
	Lower anchors
	not too deep in seat
	not too much force needed to attach
	difficult to maneuver around anchors

Technical measurements for this test

Lower anchor A
Open access rated	Yes
Depth	Visible
Force (lbs)	1
Clearance angle (degrees)	55
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	Yes
Depth	Visible
Force (lbs)	1
Clearance angle (degrees)	49
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	Yes
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	Yes
Tether anchors can be accessed while seatback is properly positioned for use of LATCH	Not measured

Lower anchor A
No lower latch for this seat position
Lower anchor B
No lower latch for this seat position
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	Yes
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	Yes
Tether anchors can be accessed while seatback is properly positioned for use of LATCH	Not measured

Lower anchor A
Open access rated	Yes
Depth	Visible
Force (lbs)	0
Clearance angle (degrees)	55
Lower anchor B
Open access rated	Yes
Depth	Visible
Force (lbs)	0
Clearance angle (degrees)	53
Tether anchor
Location	Middle seatback
Confusing hardware present	Yes
Has contrasting label within 3 inches of tether anchor	Yes
Tether anchors can be accessed while seatback is properly positioned for use of LATCH	Not measured

About the child seat anchor evaluation