Smart Cars! Yea or Nea?

In My Humble Opinion
21

[QUOTE=Tastes of Chocolate]
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.
[/QUOTE]

Jebus, my station wagon gets (real world) 25 in town, and 34 on the road. It seats 5 and can carry items as long as 10 feet inside it.
Color me underwhelmed.

22

I’ve owned a Smart since 2002 and think it’s great. I’m single with no pets so the 2 seats isn’t an issue. I can easily get all my shopping in it, and with the passenger seat folded down I can get something as big as a 6 foot ladder in it. I’m 6’5" and the head and leg room is great, better than some far bigger cars. My daily commute is about 25 miles total and is mostly suburban with around 5 sets of traffic lights and a dozen roundabouts. I consistantly get around 52 mpg. My best milage was 65mpg. It does require premium petrol which was £1.12/litre this week. If I’ve done the math right that’s $8.35/US gallon. Here in the UK vehicle tax is based on emissions. I pay £35/year where a Volkswagen Beetle would pay £125 and a Land Rover would be around £250.

It’s a bit of a cult car and a huge modding community has developed. I’ve had mine remapped and put on a high-flow air intake and exhaust. I’ve not had mine on a rolling road, but based on others with similar modifications the power is up from the standard 61bhp to around 75bhp. 0-60 time is down to around 12 seconds. With an upgraded turbo and some other tweaks over 100bhp is possible.

The handling in the standard configuration isn’t up to much. The front tyres are about half the width of the rears so it understeers quite a bit. It’s a handful in high cross winds. One of the most popular mods is to change wheels so that the tyres are the same size all around.

They call the transmission “Soft Touch”. It’s a 6 speed sequential with an electronically activated clutch. The gear lever is basically a rocker switch, click it forward to up a gear, back to go down.

Mine is one of the early generations with the 600cc turbocharged Mercedes engine. In around 2003 they went to 700cc. The current generation (which I think is the one going to the US) is a big change. It’s a bit longer and the engines are 1.0litre Mitsubishi units in both turbo and non-turbo form. The transmission is down to 5 gears. The roadster versions were discontinued a couple years ago.

23

In a couple of years when it’s time for me to get a new car I might consider it. The base price for the entry level model is around $11K. And as I recall, the EPA is redoing their calculations for MGP in 2008. According to their site the mpg per 2007 standards was 40/45 which isn’t bad, even 2008 ratings give it 33/41. The 2008 Honda Civic gets 25/36 mpg and starts at $14K. The Honda fit starts at $13,900 (might as well be $14K) and gets 27/34 mpg. So I’d say the Smart car cost enough less and get enough better gas milage to make it a worthwhile contender.

24

Wow, they reinvented a 60’s vintage VW Beetle with 2 less seats.

25

I saw one of these the other day while on my lunch hour, and I have to say, with all the Hummers and other large SUVs people are driving around, I would be terrified to drive one of those things. There doesn’t look like there’s any rear-collision crash protection at all.

26

I think it depends on what your looking for, although that a pretty obvious statement. But for me it would be great since I live downtown and normally use public transportation. I could use the car to run errands that are too difficult to do with a car but still have no trouble parking and with the gas mileage I wouldn’t be worrying about filling up all the time (since I can’t even think of a nearby gas station.)
I guess my only worry would be the safety issue, since it’s so small and there seems to be very little between me and an oncoming car

27

[QUOTE=iamthewalrus(:3=]
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?
[/QUOTE]

That was Car and Driver’s take, as well - they got 32 mpg in their test. For about the same price you can get a more functional, better performing, and safer Fit, Versa, Yaris, etc that gets better gas mileage.

I can see the appeal for people who live in an urban area where the size would be a big benefit - it does have the distinction of being the smallest car you can buy.

28

I like them, and would own one if I lived someplace with really limited parking.

I remember reading that the American version is larger.

29

[QUOTE=Johnny L.A.]
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.
[/QUOTE]

Um, yeah, the hype over the current “high-mileage” cars makes me twitch. I’ve owned 2 Ford Aspires, which were produced from something like 1994 to 1997, and they both regularly got mileage in the high 40s. Yes, it’s a small car, but no gimmicks involved. My 1995 Aspire, almost 13 years old with 204K miles on it, still hits 50 MPG now and then. Do the car companies forget that they used to be able to make high-mileage cars, without gimmicks? Oh, but that’s right, everybody wants a monster truck with power everything. :smack:

We recently bought a “high-mileage” 2008 Chevrolet Aveo. It’s a little bigger than the Aspire, and the best mileage we’ve gotten so far is 36.5 MPG. Hoping this improves once summer gets here and it gets broken in a little more; I’d like to hit 40 MPG (but even that “lofty” goal is a bit disappointing. It’ll be a sad day when the Aspire goes tits up.

30

Safety isn’t really a problem. As linked above, it has an NCAP 4 star rating (out of 5). The safety cell, known as the Tridion, is nearly crush-proof. Top Gear crashed one into a concrete barrier at 70mph and both doors still opened. A small Fiat (I think) they did the same to was nearly folded in half. Anecdotally, I met a woman who crashed hers by hitting a deer and rolling down a steep embankment. She walked away with bruised ribs. The cop on the scene estimated that in any other small car it would have been a fatality.

31

[QUOTE=kferr]
Safety isn’t really a problem. As linked above, it has an NCAP 4 star rating (out of 5). The safety cell, known as the Tridion, is nearly crush-proof. Top Gear crashed one into a concrete barrier at 70mph and both doors still opened. A small Fiat (I think) they did the same to was nearly folded in half. Anecdotally, I met a woman who crashed hers by hitting a deer and rolling down a steep embankment. She walked away with bruised ribs. The cop on the scene estimated that in any other small car it would have been a fatality.
[/QUOTE]

this is the Top Gear clip of the crash test

32

[QUOTE=Scarlett67]
Um, yeah, the hype over the current “high-mileage” cars makes me twitch. I’ve owned 2 Ford Aspires, which were produced from something like 1994 to 1997, and they both regularly got mileage in the high 40s. Yes, it’s a small car, but no gimmicks involved. My 1995 Aspire, almost 13 years old with 204K miles on it, still hits 50 MPG now and then. Do the car companies forget that they used to be able to make high-mileage cars, without gimmicks? Oh, but that’s right, everybody wants a monster truck with power everything. :smack:

We recently bought a “high-mileage” 2008 Chevrolet Aveo. It’s a little bigger than the Aspire, and the best mileage we’ve gotten so far is 36.5 MPG. Hoping this improves once summer gets here and it gets broken in a little more; I’d like to hit 40 MPG (but even that “lofty” goal is a bit disappointing. It’ll be a sad day when the Aspire goes tits up.
[/QUOTE]

the only good thing about my '88 ford crapscort was it’s great fuel mileage (1.9L throttle-body fuel injected four cylinder engine), high 30 to low 40 MPG was common, same with my '92 Dodge Shadow and '98 Neon Highline, my last two cars ('02 Neon and '07 Saturn Ion) have been more dissapointing though, low-to-mid 30’s

I just figured out my city miles yesterday, on an engine with about 4,600 miles on it, I’m getting 26 City, apparently, once you’re over 5,000 miles with the Ecotec 2.2, the mileage gets much better, high 30’s to low 40’s, call me cynical, but I’ll believe it when I see it

If the Ion doesn’t get a minimum of 30 MPG City once I pass the 5,000 mile “barrier”, I’ll seriously consider trading out of it, perhaps for one of the upcoming VW Rabbit Diesels, or Subaru Diesels

35+ MPG Highway is NOT “good fuel efficiency” to me, it’s mediocre-to-barely-acceptable, and no, you don’t need Hybrid technology to break the 35 MPG barrier

33

The clips of crash tests suggest that the Smart takes advantage of other cars’ crumple zones. How do they cope head-on with one another?!

34

[QUOTE=Johnny L.A.]
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…
[/QUOTE]

If your mission is to park in San Francisco, you get one of these.

I knew they were small, but it was when there was an article in the paper a while ago about how the city is wondering how to handle Smarts and parking spots and parking meters that it sank in just how small they are. The article said these things are small enough to park three or four in a regular spot, if you park perpendicular to the curb, like motorcycles do.

35

The total absence of crumple zones doesn’t strike me as particularly “Smart.” I like to have a buffer between me and the herds of idiots on the roads. I would want to construct a rollcage on the outside. And the wheelbase looks so small that it looks top-heavy, like an instinctive swerve to avoid a road idiot would put it on its ear. The rigidity of the body sounds like a good way to experience what it’s like to be the little ball rattling around in a can of spray paint.

ETS: I also find the name “Smart Car” to be annoying and pretentious.

36

[QUOTE=Scarlett67]
We recently bought a “high-mileage” 2008 Chevrolet Aveo. It’s a little bigger than the Aspire, and the best mileage we’ve gotten so far is 36.5 MPG. Hoping this improves once summer gets here and it gets broken in a little more; I’d like to hit 40 MPG (but even that “lofty” goal is a bit disappointing. It’ll be a sad day when the Aspire goes tits up.
[/QUOTE]
Aside from the mileage being disappointing, how do you like the Aveo? It’s one of the cars I’m considering.

37

[QUOTE=MacTech]

35+ MPG Highway is NOT “good fuel efficiency” to me, it’s mediocre-to-barely-acceptable, and no, you don’t need Hybrid technology to break the 35 MPG barrier
[/QUOTE]

Yeah, this kind of infuriates me. I have a Mazda 3 that gets in the low to mid 30s highway (peaked at around 35 mpg, but 32 is typical). That’s touted these days as quite exceptional fuel economy. WTF? In the mid-80s, there were a bunch of cars rating in the 40s and 50s mpg. I had an ugly baby blue 1985 Chevette and, while officially it’s rated at about 41 mpg highway, I’ve gotten around 50 mpg out of it. How is it that 20 years later, the bar has gone down from the mid-40s to the mid-30s in terms of what is good fuel economy? I mean, the friggin hybrids aren’t even getting as good fuel economy as the linked-to class of 1985 vehicles.

38

My insurance agent fiance tells me they’re frightfully hard to insure. Be sure to check that out before purchase. Her company won’t insure one outside the state of California.

39

I was wondering about insurance. I always hate the whole “but everyone else is driving big cars!” thing, but had a feeling it might affect rates.

40

[QUOTE=pulykamell]
Yeah, this kind of infuriates me. I have a Mazda 3 that gets in the low to mid 30s highway (peaked at around 35 mpg, but 32 is typical). That’s touted these days as quite exceptional fuel economy. WTF? In the mid-80s, there were a bunch of cars rating in the 40s and 50s mpg. I had an ugly baby blue 1985 Chevette and, while officially it’s rated at about 41 mpg highway, I’ve gotten around 50 mpg out of it. How is it that 20 years later, the bar has gone down from the mid-40s to the mid-30s in terms of what is good fuel economy? I mean, the friggin hybrids aren’t even getting as good fuel economy as the linked-to class of 1985 vehicles.
[/QUOTE]
Compare the weight and safety features of those 1985 cars with your Mazda 3 and you will have your answer.