I was driving down the road just now in my little Volkswagen and a man pulled up next to me in one of these new Smart Cars. Cool. I thought, that thing is half the size of my car and looks like a pregnant rollerskate. But apparently they are economical, it goes about 90mph and get’s about 40mpg in the city. That’s not bad.
I sort of lump these into the Mini/Miata/MG world. Not gimicky but not exactly all that special either.
What do you think? I know I’d hate to wreck in one. Hell, even a head to head collision with a small car would be bad.
I think they’re neat. I wouldn’t want one as my only car, but for city driving they fit the bill well. They’re fairly popular in the UK and Europe as the cities tend to be less car-oriented than in America, with narrower streets and less parking spots.
The Roadster version is kind of fun too, but I don’t think that model is available Stateside.
I imagine you’d quickly get fed up with them if you had to do any length of motorway/freeway driving regularly, though.
I drove one about 6 or 7 years ago, and, I must say, they are surprisingly roomy on the inside. They’re small, but they (or at least the one I drove) only hold two passengers, so there’s actually quite a bit of leg room and it’s pretty comfortable. That said, despite the fact that they’re pretty solidly built, I’m not sure I’d be comfortable driving that thing around American streets, with the huge cars we have all around here. I’d rather take my chances in a slightly larger vehicle.
Funny you should bring it up. Being close to Canada, I see them with some frequency. I saw one the other day and I wondered: What are the crash statistics of Smart cars? (i.e., how many, and what damages?)
I first saw a pair of Smarts on display at The Block At Orange arund 2000 or 2001. I thought they were totally cool. My coworker said they looked scary. If I lived in a city, I think it would be great.
Absolutely yay! I’m looking forward to seeing more of these around, and if they catch on, I’m sure there will eventually be one in my household. We squeed over them the entire time we were in Europe last year.
Well, I want one. Looks fun to drive and economical, and would work fine for quick trips around the city, which I do all the time. I can’t see it being a primary vehicle for even a couple, though. Would two people and a week’s worth of groceries fit in one? (And if you have to go to the store every day, kind of defeats the purpose of saving gas, right?) Luggage for a weekend trip? Doesn’t look like it to me.
They’re still kind of expensive, too. We have a Vibe, which has pretty darn good gas mileage (considering it’s about twice the size of a Smart Car) and is about the same price, last I checked. In a perfect world, I’d like a hybrid SUV for big/vacation trips and a Smart Car for daily use.
I’ve been browsing the site, and it looks like a wonderful car, I’d want one! It would be good for Maui, I think. Driving here isn’t too hectic compared to bigger cities, and I have no reason to even hit 90 MPH really.
I showed the site to my friend in Portugal, and he brought up how they’ve had it for years, so he knows more about it than I would, of course, and he’s been praising it.
I’ll give some quotes…
Plus, he even showed me safety test results for it:
Yeah, he pretty much went salesman on me, but at the same time, he also showed me an interior shot where the seats had a cool funky design on them. I really want one, now. I’m kinda depressed I don’t have the money.
They’ve opened up a dealership just down the road from my office and one of these days I’ll give them a test drive.
For now, I’m very disappointed in their fuel economy. The UK site shows that Fortwos sold there get 57-61MPG. The US site is showing 33/41 using 2008 EPA standards. 33MPG for this car? You’re kidding right? Can’t they do better then that? If they were offering a car thata got 50+MPG, I’d have one as soon as I could sell my current 31MPG car. For 33MPG city, nope.
I am also disappointed in the mileage they get in the states. I’d be happy to drive a little-bitty car if I got good mileage, but I could get similar mileage in a Civic, or a Fit, or a Yaris, or a Saturn whatever, and still have 4 seats when I wanted it. What’s the benefit supposed to be?
I was considering one, until I saw the rather unimpressive fuel mileage, and the latest Car and Driver review wasn’t too good as well, in addition to mediocre fuel mileage, poor handling, and a lack of storage space, the manumatic transmission was slow and sloppy (0-60 in 14.4 seconds, laggy, lurchy shifts)
I can get close to the mileage of the Smart in my Ion, and I get more space, four doors, an actual trunk, and decent acceleration and handling, the same can be said for the Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris, Scion xA, Mazda 3 and other small cars
for my purposes, the Smart doesn’t have any redeeming traits at the moment
slap a small turbodiesel in there, and a REAL manual transmission, and I might be interested, better fuel mileage and torque than a small gasoline engine (or maybe I should just get one of those Hayabusa engine powered Smarts…)
Ok, so what’s manumatic? I suppose what I was wondering is: do you use it the same way as tipronic, or do you have to do something else with the stick other than use +/- to shift? Is there a clutch?
“Manumatic” is just a catch-all term for manual-automatics and can apply to a bunch of different transmissions, although a quick wikipedia-ing tells me the term was originally used on some late 50s British cars. From what I remember, it was definitely clutchless, with a tap up and down to shift (or perhaps it was left-right). I think it would automatically shift for you if you forget to shift up.
I hadn’t looked into the fuel economy. Sounds pretty bad. My dad had a 1984 Chevy Sprint (not Metro, though he got one of those too). 1.0l three-cylinder engine. I personally saw 60 mpg in it. Normal economy was about 50 mpg. Versus the Smart the Sprint had four seats, room for cargo (pretty good too, with the rear seat-back folded down), could also do 90 mph, and was very inexpensive. It was zippy in city traffic, had trouble with long steep-ish grades, and the controls were rudimentary.
IMO a quarter-century on, a car as small as the Smart should get 50 mpg.
By the book, my '66 MGB will do 0-60 in 12.5 seconds. This was a sprightly roadster. Of course modern cars are better by any performance metric than my old roadster; but by comparison the Smart’s acceleration isn’t all that bad. I’m driving a Prius now, and Edmunds says it takes nearly 11 seconds to reach 60.
I guess my point is that you buy the tool you need for the mission. If your mission is to get up to a given speed in the shortest amount of time, then you’re going to have to pay for it in fuel. If your mission is to use the least amount of fuel, then you have to pay for it in performance. But if the Smart only gets 40 mpg on the freeway, it sounds to me as if the performance penalty is too great for the economy.
Yeah, they really don’t make a whole lot of sense.
You can get a Honda Fit for $13,950 MSRP. It gets 28/35 mpg city/hwy. It’s exactly the same price as the Smart, but it’s a lot more vehicle.
This cite from the Government of Canada lists the average annual fuel costs for all the various high-mileage cars available. The Smart isn’t that much better than the competition:
Toyota Prius: $738
Honda Civic Hybrid: $810
Smart FourTwo: $1080
Ford Escape Hybrid: $1098
Honda Fit: $1170
Mini Cooper: $1260
The thing is, when the competition already gets very good mileage, it takes a big jump to make an appreciable difference in operating cost. Going from 10 to 20 mpg cuts your fuel bill in half. Going from 34 to 45 (the fit to the FourTwo) is less than a 33% savings. But the Smart also requires premium gas, which increases the cost of fuel by at least 10%. So the Smart only saves you $90/yr in operating cost over the Honda. $7.50 a month. For that, you’re giving up an awful lot.
