|
|
I have to admit that these cars fascinate me. But what is their performance like? I have read a few first takes, but no one really has done a definative test regarding their relative characteristics.
They would not work for me, but my hat goes off to those whose lifestyles allow for this. I personally think it would be fun, assuming that their performance was not drop dead aweful.
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Its engine figures are pretty bad for the USDM $12-15k range (in Europe 1.0L engines aren't unusual) - the closest equivalent I can think of is the '92-'95 Civic CX, also with 71hp (and probably similar weight). But I've driven that Civic and I liked it. A lot will be riding on how good the transmission is.
One thing I find interesting about this car is that in Japan and Europe it started a revival of the rear-engined subcompact (the Mitsubishi i followed, and rumor has it Fiat is working on one). I think the Mini's superior controllability all but ended that trend, but modern suspensions make it at least possible. With that in place, crash protection standards are making it actually desirable, because a good frontal crumple zone is easy with no engine up there. The i is a 4-seater, and I think it's way cooler than the smart.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"The problem for the Smart is:
Edmunds lists 9 coupes under $15k. The highway mileage ranges from 30 -40.
Edmunds lists 19 sedans under $15k. The highway mileage ranges from 29 -39. "
EPA Highway fuel economy is irrelevant for the Smart. City cycle fuel economy is what matters because it's too small to safely share the highway with light trucks in my opinion.
As consumers why to we pay so much attention to the EPA highway fuel economy number when we normally experience fuel economy closer to the EPA city number in day-to-day use? I never drive a steady 55mph. I'm mostly driving stop and go with an occasional tank at a nice steady 80mph on the highway.
|
|
|
|
mnorm1
- May 17, 2007 7:26 pm
(#15 Total: 31)
|
|
|
|
Old habits die hard. I'm used to seeing hiway mileage touted.
Is 40 mpg in the city expected?
City mileage for the sedans listed on Edmunds ranged 22-34.
Edmunds videos on the smart:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/dc/Search?q=smart&rP=1#
I had to laugh when the Buick Lucerne commercial came on.
|
|
|
|
gcn
- May 17, 2007 9:34 pm
(#16 Total: 31)
|
|
|
|
The Smart doesn't have a front crumple zone, it has a rear one. The (highly visible) frame transfers a frontal impact to the rear of the car where it is absorbed while the occupants are protected in the middle. This unusual arrangement appears to work quite well. It will be interesting to see the results of US crash testing (don't forget it has passed crash tests elsewhere, and they are more stringent than US ones in some respects, and vice-versa in others).
This also isn't the first generation of the Smart, this one has recently been completely redesigned, a redesign which includes changes to improve safety, and to make it less expensive to produce. Whether the latter is enough to make it profitable this time around isn't yet clear, but it should at least cause a smaller loss than the first one.
For some reason the US isn't getting the turbo-charged one, at least initially. This might prove to be a mistake, even if most buyers opt for the non-turbo one - there's plenty of cars which avoid being labelled "underpowered" simply because one version is more powerful than the one(s) which sell in volume.
|
|
|
|
|
|
gcn is correct - the Smart has a super strong passenger compartment structure rather than a crumple zone. In one test I saw recently, they ran a Smart into a solid concrete barrier at 60mph head on. Of course the car was completly destroyed and the occupants would have died from the forces of the impact. However, they would not have been injured from being smashed by the car itself. In fact the doors still opened and closed properly - a testatment to the strength of the cabin structure.
The target market for this car would be those folks who commute to work everyday and want to do so using as little of the their hard earned money as possible for purchasing fuel. Another advantage of the Smart is it's ability to park perpendicular to the road due to it's short length.
Having lived overseas for the past 15 years, I have wondered for some time why American car manufacturers don't sell some of their great little cars in the states. It seems the only small cars they offer to Americans or poorly built underperformers which tends to stereo-type all small cars as junk.
Here in South Africa we have a couple of small cars made by American mfgs. that I am sure would sell well back home. Chevrolet has the Aveo a very popular small car while Ford sells the Ka. Personally I think the Ka is ugly, but it has great build quality and is popular in Europe as well.
Judging by the poor performance of US auto manufacturers it would seem that now is the time to start thinking outside the box and start building products that people want. They could start with an exterior that looks so good you (the buyer ) just has to have one. As for me I think the Smart is a good example of just such a design.
|
|
|
|
otaku18
- May 17, 2007 11:29 pm
(#18 Total: 31)
|
|
|
|
Its a neat little car, very cute as small cars can be. But very impractical for anything but singles or couples who live in the city. I've only seen two both in the city I live in (boise idaho) definetly seems a bit pricey and it seems like the fuel economy could be better. A diesel like they have elsewhere would be nice. I wouldn't mind seeing more of them. Great for downtown parking etc. I'd be afraid though of a wreck, that and I''m not sure I could fit in one.
|
|
|
|
dancote
- May 18, 2007 5:16 pm
(#19 Total: 31)
|
|
|
|
I'm an early adopter; got my $99 deposit down as soon as it was available. Saw these when I was working in England in the late 90's and have been wanting one since then. Just a pity we won't be getting the turbo-diesel but with some well-chosen Brabus goodies I'll get by. (Or go to Canada for an engine swap}
Don't need a big car any longer and all the other small choices are way too "me-too" for my taste (Scion xB is the exception). Pick-ups and SUVs? You gotta be kidding unless you need a truck for work or you have to go off-road to get to your house.
Safety? These little cars have had to pass some pretty stringent European requirements for years. Of course they also have the benefit of sharing the road with considerably better drivers than we have to deal with here.
Don't ride big Harleys any more either. My Suzuki Burgman 650 scooter is more than adequate for solo local trips and two-up touring.
Now if I could just figure a way to down-size from a 40' diesel-pusher motor home I'd have the whole thing licked.
Regards,
Dan
|
|
|
|
evolow
- May 20, 2007 12:00 pm
(#20 Total: 31)
|
|
|
|
I believe Mercedes will do well with this car. As stated already it will be the new “cool” car in the beginning and after will cater to only a small demographic but that is expected. Also SMART makes the four door “forfour” and even a convertible in Europe. If those models were brought to the states in a few years it would certainly broaden buyer range.
Let’s not forget the mini!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Mini is a performer. It is not an economy car in the strict sense of the word. This thing, from what I understand, is underpowered, has no back seat. Can hardly handle a trip the grocery store. And for all those "urbanites" how will it handle the necessary trips to Pottery Barn and Crate and Barrel? Guess you'll have to take a taxi for that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
People who shop at those stores will be buying this as a second or third car, not a primary. Maybe as the primary car for one family member. It is cheap, after all. But I wouldn't know, the urbanites I lived among tend to be Craigslist shoppers instead.
|
|
|
|
bumpy
- May 21, 2007 2:30 pm
(#23 Total: 31)
|
|
|
|
The opportunity to swap a back seat I never use for improved gas mileage I can use every day sounds pretty good to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of my best friends in college had an early Miata. One of the most fun cars to drive ever. Light, nimble, perfect 5 speed transmission, but it had no back seat. When the two of us were just riding around it was fine, but I can't count how many times he had to borrow my car or some other friends car inorder to get something done.
For those with disposible income, this can be the perfect solution (wondering why someone wouldn't buy a 2 year old used miata instead). But for those that want reliable transportation that can address most, (if not all) our needs, this solution is severely lacking.
Why not belly up to the bar and get a Prius. At least you get more room and better gas milage?
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Prius is twice the cost, and my Miata gets 25mpg at best and that's not unusual. For $15k I'd get an xB or something like that, but I can see why someone would be emotionally attracted to the smart and if that's the case, there's not much you can do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can get a Prius for 22,500 before incentives. Yes that is significantly more, but if mpg is the king of considerations...
There are a ton of cars that you can get between $14K and $17K, so lets not pretend that these cars are practical. The emotional is the center of the draw, and it will wear off. The allure of the Mini and other "emotional" cars is that they have a sold practicality that can sustain the brand. Therefore, when the newness wears off the car is still considered a good choice. This car will not have that necessary trait for long term success.
|
|
|
|
flicmod
- May 22, 2007 9:34 am
(#27 Total: 31)
|
|
|
|
Once upon a time, Honda had the Insight. It was a two-seat hybrid with quirky styling. A company named Toyota came along with their version of a hybrid vehicle and they called it the Prius. While the Prius cost more than the Insight, the added fuel mileage and practicality (back seat) was packaged in an equally quirky container. The Insight is no more. The Prius reigns as the poster child for compact hybrids.
Moral of the story: The only people that will buy these cutesy mini people-movers are the ones that are willing to sacrifice practicality. Based upon the current trend of crossovers that afford lots of practicality, I don't see the Smart as getting very far... again. In the end, the Prius will still reign supreme for compact cars with excellent MPG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
flicmod
- May 23, 2007 9:09 pm
(#29 Total: 31)
|
|
|
|
Haha! How the heck did you find that Loren? I guess if we ever have a problem in this country with people falling out of 12 story windows we could always cushion the sidewalks with Smart Car's :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
hmm wel i gotta say, these cars are pretty cool, in a 'out-there' way, but seriously, these cars wont really work in the US...New York, Los Angeles, sure where space is tight and people want to stand out, but i cant see it taking off...they havnt really shook the world here in Australia, and i think Australia is a good as any nation to depict the type of buyers Smart can expect....both large nations with a passion for larger cars
i mean, when theres cars like the Fit or Yaris, why would you want a over-priced buzz box? Smart is cool, but Europe is really the only place these cars will work.plus Mini's are much cooler.
|
|
|
|
bapcha
- Jun 13, 2007 4:39 pm
(#31 Total: 31)
|
|
|
|
It WILL FLOP. They should cut the price in HALF and try India/China.
I wish Smart very bad luck in the US. Can't imagine Penske getting into a dud like this one. I thought he was smart. Too rich perhaps.
|
|
