Drove a Smart ForTwo yesterday

[JSH]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(scoot @ Jun 21 2007, 11:39 AM) [snapback]465795[/snapback]</div>

I also drove the Smart as part of the road show. My impressions of the car were a little different from those of the original poster. Here's what I thought:

1. Seating was extremely comfortable, particularly on driver's side. I'm 6' 4". There is more leg room for the driver than for the passenger.

2. The transmission is just different from what we are used to. It's a manual transmission that is controlled with an automatic mechnism that operates a clutch (yes, a real clutch) and does the shifting for you. So you can have it in automatic mode and it will shift somewhat abruptly, but less so if you lift your foot off the gas at anticipated shift times. I did not use it in manual shift mode but have heard that it works nicely like that. Given what the transmission is, I see no advantage of a conventional manual transmission over this transmission.

3. The cars shown were not US - configured models because they aren't ready. In general, it seemed very much like Smart is not quite ready to sell the cars. I don't think I would want one of the first ones off the line -- probably lots of little glitches to work out.

4. And now, the killer. Gas mileage. While not stated yet, they are saying "it will average 40 MPG using the new EPA rating methods". That's not much better than a Civic. It's a fair bit worse than a Prius or Civic Hybrid, both of which are much more car (and more money). This is a car that should be getting 60 MPG. If it only gets 40 then they have really missed the boat somewhere.

My partner and I have two cars and a pickup. A 2007 Prius, a 2002 MB Hatchback that will be sold within the next year, and a pickup that will be sold when we stop moving between two houses. I'm looking to replace the MB. My first choice would be a Smart (except for my MPG objection) because I don't need a larger car given that we have the Prius. My second choice would be a Civic coupe, but what I would really like is a Civic hatchback.

The suggestion of a Mini as an alternative to a Smart isn't really a fair comparison. Apples and oranges. Minis are comparitively expensive, NOT green (look at their emissions), and BMW cost/reliability of ownership. Granted, Smart is a wildcard in ownership costs.

The plan at this point is to sell the MB when I get the touch up paint done and drive the pickup until I find a suitable replacement car. By then, hopefully sell the pickup.

Oh one other Smart plus was that it claims to be highly recyclable and very green in production, not just in driving. That's a factor too.
[/b]

Tranmission: The VW DSG is the same way. It is a computer controlled manual and is a bit jerky and slow in automatic mode. If you use it in Manual mode and drive like you normally would with a manual than it is very smooth. That means you need to let up on the throttle a bit when upshifting and match rpm's when downshifting. If you just bang on the shifter it is not very smooth but that is the driver's fault not the cars. I was very impressed and found the DSG to be very handy in city traffic.

Mileage: Is the 40mpg a city, highway, or a combined number? I've heard it described both ways. If it is a combined number that is very good. A 2007 civic is only 26/29/34 mpg on the new EPA method. the Civic Hybrid is only 40/42/45 mpg and costs $10K more than the Smart. The Smart is never going to have great highway mpg because of the shape. It is just to tall and short to be at all aerodynamic. It should have good city mileage though because it is light and aerodynamics are not as much of a factor.

How it is regulated could play a big role in the success of the Smart. If it is allowed to park nose in like a motorcycle instead of parallel parking it could be very successful in large cities were parking is tight. That is the market that the smart is designed for, it is not a car for suburbia.

[Tideland Prius]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ Jun 21 2007, 10:00 AM) [snapback]465806[/snapback]</div>

Tranmission: The VW DSG is the same way. It is a computer controlled manual and is a bit jerky and slow in automatic mode. If you use it in Manual mode and drive like you normally would with a manual than it is very smooth. That means you need to let up on the throttle a bit when upshifting and match rpm's when downshifting. If you just bang on the shifter it is not very smooth but that is the driver's fault not the cars. I was very impressed and found the DSG to be very handy in city traffic.

Mileage: Is the 40mpg a city, highway, or a combined number? I've heard it described both ways. If it is a combined number that is very good. A 2007 civic is only 26/29/34 mpg on the new EPA method. the Civic Hybrid is only 40/42/45 mpg and costs $10K more than the Smart. The Smart is never going to have great highway mpg because of the shape. It is just to tall and short to be at all aerodynamic. It should have good city mileage though because it is light and aerodynamics are not as much of a factor.

How it is regulated could play a big role in the success of the Smart. If it is allowed to park nose in like a motorcycle instead of parallel parking it could be very successful in large cities were parking is tight. That is the market that the smart is designed for, it is not a car for suburbia.
[/b]

Yeah but the current one (in Canada) gets > 50mpg.

[JSH]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius @ Jun 22 2007, 12:46 AM) [snapback]466222[/snapback]</div>

Yeah but the current one (in Canada) gets > 50mpg.
[/b]

Yes it does but Smart only sells the turbo diesel in Canada not the gasoline versions. The diesel is rated at 51/56/63 mpg but also takes 19.8 seconds to go from 0 to 62 mph and has a top speed of 80 mph. This engine was deemed unsuitable for American tastes. We only get the most powerful gasoline engine and as such get the worst mileage.

I'm still curious if the the 40 mpg figure I keep hearing is combined or highway mileage. Anybody know? I plan to check out the Smart when the tour comes to Birmingham in September but I would be nice to know a bit earlier. If I am going to make a switch, I need to sell the TDI in the summer when gas prices are high and diesel is low.

[Tideland Prius]

Indeed it is the 40hp, 0.7 litre 3-cylinder turbo diesel version.

[SW03ES]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius @ Jun 17 2007, 06:13 PM) [snapback]463590[/snapback]</div>

They are pretty safe though. You will die (from the g-forces) before the car crushes/collapses. Fifth Gear did a 70mph head-on crash experiment to a piece of concrete. Search Youtube for the video
[/b]

That doesn't make any sense. As Priusenvy said you need crushable structure to absorb crash impact and provide safety for the occupants. There is absolutely no way you would crash a smart at 70 MPH and fare as well as crashing something like a Yaris in the same way. Its just physically not possible, thats why Smart cars haven't been legal here for so long.

You WANT the car to crush and collapse, if the car isn't crushing and collapsing those forces are being absorbed by the occupants! Ever wonder why race cars fly apart into a million peices? Thats why.

I just watched the you tube video? HAHAHA If you never want your kids to walk again buy em a Smart. My Kids will be in real cars.

[JSH]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SW03ES @ Jun 25 2007, 11:25 AM) [snapback]467614[/snapback]</div>

That doesn't make any sense. As Priusenvy said you need crushable structure to absorb crash impact and provide safety for the occupants. There is absolutely no way you would crash a smart at 70 MPH and fare as well as crashing something like a Yaris in the same way. Its just physically not possible, thats why Smart cars haven't been legal here for so long.

You WANT the car to crush and collapse, if the car isn't crushing and collapsing those forces are being absorbed by the occupants! Ever wonder why race cars fly apart into a million peices? Thats why.

I just watched the you tube video? HAHAHA If you never want your kids to walk again buy em a Smart. My Kids will be in real cars.
[/b]

Yes you want crush zones but you don't want the area directly around the occupants to crush. The Smart has the engine in the back so the entire front area is a crush zone. The smart is designed so these external areas crush but the main cell does not. The smart also has seat belts that release tension to allow you to decelerate more slowly and a steering wheel that retracts toward the dash in an accident. If you are hit in the rear the engine cradle is designed to separate and slide underneath the passenger compartment.

The Yaris has the engine in front so though the area is larger the crushable area may not be.

After looking at the IIHS pictures of the Yaris compared to the Mercedes Video of the E-Class vs Smart I don't see that the Yaris is any better than the Smart. Remember the Top Gear Smart crash is at 70 mph compared to only 35 mph for the Yaris on the IIHS website. Also both the Top Gear and Mercedes video are of the first generation Smart, not the current one. To get apples to apples we will have to what for the NHTSA or IIHS to crash a new Smart.

All in all I would say the Smart is much safer than my motorcycle and about the same price and mileage. Not to mention it carries the same amount of people and more stuff. It doesn't fall over either!

[jiepsie]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ Jun 21 2007, 07:00 PM) [snapback]465806[/snapback]</div>

Tranmission: The VW DSG is the same way.
[/b]

DSG is similar, but in a very different league. It's actually two 3-speed transmissions, each with a clutch. So when you're in first gear on tranny 1, tranny 2 has already selected 2nd gear. When it's time to shift, all that happens is clutch 1 disconnects while clutch 2 connects. That's very smooth, power is never lost because the disconnecting and connecting overlap.

The Smart however is a "normal" manual gearbox with servos to automate it. So it has to disconnect, shift, and then connect again.

[JSH]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(lowlander @ Jun 25 2007, 03:07 PM) [snapback]467751[/snapback]</div>

DSG is similar, but in a very different league. It's actually two 3-speed transmissions, each with a clutch. So when you're in first gear on tranny 1, tranny 2 has already selected 2nd gear. When it's time to shift, all that happens is clutch 1 disconnects while clutch 2 connects. That's very smooth, power is never lost because the disconnecting and connecting overlap.

The Smart however is a "normal" manual gearbox with servos to automate it. So it has to disconnect, shift, and then connect again.
[/b]

I understand the DSG has two clutches. What I was trying to say is the feeling is the same. When you are manually shifting the shifts are very smooth if you match RPMs while downshifting and lift the throttle upshifting. It is jerky if you just move the lever and let the computer try to do everything. It's not really bad but not as good as someone that is good with a manual. So the driver still makes a difference.

I found the DSG to shift slowly when in manual mode.

[SW03ES]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jhinton @ Jun 25 2007, 03:59 PM) [snapback]467743[/snapback]</div>

Yes you want crush zones but you don't want the area directly around the occupants to crush. The Smart has the engine in the back so the entire front area is a crush zone. The smart is designed so these external areas crush but the main cell does not. The smart also has seat belts that release tension to allow you to decelerate more slowly and a steering wheel that retracts toward the dash in an accident. If you are hit in the rear the engine cradle is designed to separate and slide underneath the passenger compartment.[/b]

I watched the video too. All modern cars have these features.

[jstack]

A super reliable scion or yaris would be much better for your daughter,

Cost is only one point, the others are service, reliability, and safety.