|
|
In the late 80s and early 90s I owned a Honda CRX HF. It easily made 40-50 mpg. In fact its performance and weight was almost identical to the smart. Honda needs to dump the insight and bring back the CRX.
|
|
 |
|
jriz
- May 11, 2008 1:31 pm
(#32 Total: 33)
|
|
|
|
Also throw in the fact that its EPA air pollution score is a 6 out of 10. Not particularly green there, either.
|
|
|
|
6sptl
- May 11, 2008 10:24 am
(#31 Total: 33)
|
|
|
|
The smart is the is the dumbest car ever produced, but dumber still are the legion of buyers that buy it because they think its green. It is not, it fuel economy is slightly better than cars that carry twice as many people thus its not a fuel saver by any measure. It drives poorly and to top it of it has poor safety as now proven by the gov. Three stars is not average, since there are no cars in the market that do worse than 3 stars, essentially every modern car gets at worst 4. Aside from being undenyably cute the Smart is a car for the DUMB indeed. NOT GREEN, NOT FUN, NOT SAFE, NOT SMART AT ALLL!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting, you seem to be correct. The 1st test I read of the new version listed it as a turbo but now the only mention I can find is Canada will get the turbo next year (along with getting the diesel back).
Good reason to wait a year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The US-spec Fortwo's engine isn't turbocharged.
The thing about gas mileage is that there's a "sweet spot" where you'll get the best economy. That's typically around 35-45 mph, depending on your gearing and the engine's tuning. While I'll admit that 87.3 mpg in a US-spec Fortwo is improbable without exceptional circumstances, the car should be capable of hitting the 50's. Cruise long-distance at 35 mph and you might even top 60 mpg. But who wants to do that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
'So far I get the impression people want this car to fail. People dismiss it's good features and drone on endlessly about it's weaknesses while insulting the owners.'
It's almost as if they DON'T protest enough, their mom will make them drive one.
Especially odd because the 'haters' are overwhelmingly people who have little to no experience with the car.
Human nature is a funny thing, if something is different enough a few will always be reaching for the pitchforks.
|
|
|
|
estreka
- May 10, 2008 1:37 pm
(#27 Total: 33)
|
|
|
|
subarctic north - Great Falls, MT |
|
|
I think people misunderstand the benefits of turbos. I'm fairly certain FirstWagon isn't saying turbos produce worse gas mileage, which they don't. Contrary, my car gets better mileage with forced induction. But the propensity of drivers running around at WOT will of course decrease mileage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Well, Imperial gallons are 20% bigger than US ones, as you may or may not know. Try Googling "1 imperial gallon to gallon." Google is a unit converter, too! "
Of course I know that, that's why I included the word Imperial. Normally I just convert over to the small US gallon to save confusion but I was in a hurry.
It would have been interesting to see how a Fit would have done in those crosswinds. I driven a number of small cars over the years and they all get pushed around in the wind. No big deal.
I really hope while they have the Smart, they reserve a couple tanks of gas to driving in the conservative manner that the sort of people who buy Smarts do.
It's an 1800 lb car with a 1 litre motor. It should be capable of terrific mileage. However having a turbo means it can also burn a lot of gas if you keep it floored all the time.
So far I get the impression people want this car to fail. People dismiss it's good features and drone on endlessly about it's weaknesses while insulting the owners.
I'm hoping the smart paves the way for a flood of Japanese micro cars. They are the perfect second car for most families and are a far better solution to saving gas then hybrids, fuel cells, electrics etc.
Less mass uses less energy, it's just simple physics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the Smart will be a pseudo-status car the same way a Prius is or was. You'll be a sensible greenie. However, as a lover of Mini Coopers this car does not do any better on any of the mileage stats than a Mini and compares unfavorably everywhere else, i.e., storage, safety, features, etc. It is a little cheaper on MSRP but if you price it by what you get, it's more expensive. Having said that, I still give Mercedes credit for some great styling and making a really unique car. We need more not less of that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why would a SMART be any better than a FIT or Yaris in LA? All the designated spaces are... designated. If you try to fit in-between a space, you'll get fined.
All the valuable spaces are metered and if you jam between two cars, you're just asking for a SMART keying or SMART bumper recovery.
For the USA, at a certain point, it's the law of diminshing returns. A FIT or Yaris is small enough but doesn't make you sacrifice. Going smaller doesn't give you anything.
poor mpgs(for the size), expensive (for the size), rollover rated equal to a Explorer SUV... but you get to look like a tool.
FYI, people pointing and smiling at you isn't necessarily a good thing. You would get the same reaction if you drove a Barbie pink Corvette.
I would give any SMART driver a sympathy wave, "Good luck Gomer. I hope you make it home."
At least you aren't required to wear a helmet... although buyers may have had their bells rung a few times to think this purchase was a good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frankly I consider the Smart to be no bargain. For the same price you can buy a Yaris, Versa or Fit that seats 4 and is much more stable. However, I have to agree this is a city car and if 90% of your driving is in a big urban area like NYC or LA with serious parking concerns, I can see where some might choose to buy one. Sadly, Europe always seems to get better city oriented cars like the new Opel Agila with an impressive 1.3 liter CDTI engine that gets a combined 52 MPG. Compare that to what GM is currently offering here!
|
|
|
|
|
|
if you're looking for a good time in the smart, put a motorcycle engine in it like these guys did:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtDTG18MxIs
and wow, I didn't realize it would get pushed around by the wind that much. although I guess it makes sense, since it's such a small, light car that is relatively tall for its proportions.
|
|
|
|
estreka
- May 9, 2008 9:27 pm
(#21 Total: 33)
|
|
|
|
subarctic north - Great Falls, MT |
|
|
"I hope part of your test was the daily routine where you might go out w/ a couple friends and grocery store... well I guess that would be one friend and one friend with bus pass"
Haha, I've been racking my brain trying to come up with a hillarious 'designated driver' joke for the Smart, but that's much better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Did YUGO do a secret name change to SMART?
the video is funny. The rollover rating is the same as a Ford Explorer- meaning horrible for a passenger car.
I hope part of your test was the daily routine where you might go out w/ a couple friends and grocery store... well I guess that would be one friend and one friend with bus pass.
|
|
|
|
|
|
next to the Saturn Ion and late 90s Mercury Cougar, this SMART is the worst car I've ever driven. I struggle to find even one good thing about it. I'd rather drive a used Neon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, Imperial gallons are 20% bigger than US ones, as you may or may not know. Try Googling "1 imperial gallon to gallon." Google is a unit converter, too!
That knocks the 100 mpg imperial down to 83.3 mpg (us). And diesel is usually good for another 30% over gas, which brings the theoretical gas performance down to 64 mpg (us). That's getting close, but I still have a hard time with that figure unless serious drafting behind big rigs and a snail's pace are involved.
But we'll have a whole year to try to duplicate those claims. It's already been on one fuel economy test. The results will be out in a week or two.
|
|
|
|
|
|
No Shake 'n' Bake, James? Aw.
"Slingshot engaged!"
I can see it now.
JDP: Shake...
Sadlier: And bake!
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Also, to the person who got 87.3 mpg. That's just impossible"
Not really. I know someone who has beaten 100 mpg (Imperial) on a diesel Smart. He doesn't say if he has a gas or a diesel.
|
|
|
|
jriz
- May 9, 2008 2:27 pm
(#15 Total: 33)
|
|
|
|
A few clarifications:
The video makes it seem like I was following closer than I was. We were very mindful of avoiding drafting at all times. I was well outside the range of the Prius.
Also, to the person who got 87.3 mpg. That's just impossible. Either you were drafting behind a school bus downhill in neutral or there was a serious calculation error.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Still nothing like a motorcycle. Changing lean angles all the time for wind gusts/semis is really not fun.
|
|
