OK, just a little food for thought here for those that think the smart isn't so great on mileage.
Check out a couple of these MOTORCYCLES on Fuelly. So next time some one questions...Why, you tell them it could be worse and you're happy with what you have and they really should be so concerned. There's worse things out there. These motorcycles have engines that are almost comparable in size but much lighter in weight.
I'm not bike bashing but really, smart aren't all bad. We've got A/C, CD, shelter from rain, air bags, seat belts, a roll cage and the list goes on.
Click on the pictures to link you to the mileage list....
When I first got my smart last year, I had an informal contest going with the bike riders at work to see who got better mileage. Most ride Harleys, with a few Honda and Yamaha tourers in there as well. The only one who was able to beat my average was a guy with an older 400cc bike! They still give me a hard time, but I tell them that at least I can get that kind of mileage year round, and I don't get wet when it rains!
I have a honda sabre. 1100 cc, so slightely bigger engine. I get between 42 and 48 mpg in it. It all depends on the bike. Sports bikes are bult for performance ( high rpm, high compression, guicker gearing) so they get lower mpg. But my bike being a cruiser doesn't have such a high compression and more relaxed gearing.... still quick in my opinion though. Fast enough for something on two wheel anyway.
They may have similar engine displacement, but that's essentially where the comparison ends. Many of these bikes are generating 150+ hp and running sub-11 second quarter mile times. Not quite built for maximum fuel efficiency.
I have two bikes, both of which have Trip computers that show their average MPG.
The Triumph Speed Triple is fairly steady at 45MPG. The BMW R1200GSA can get between 45 and 50 MPG but has the aerodynamics of a barn door, so the economy drops off rapidly at Interstate speeds. That said, it holds more fuel than the smart at right around 9 gallons, so gas stops are few and far between.
My smart gets 35MPG on a good day, and I drive it in the same way as I drive the bikes, which certainly isn't with Fuel Economy as a priority, so in my case the bikes are much better.
I agree with you.....years ago when I was 'allowed' to ride (j/k Sweetie ), my Kawasaki 900 would get about 36mpgs and at the time I thought that was great. I don't think the new bikes, with F.I. and all, have made the same kind of progress that cars have made in the past 20-30 years.
That said, I DO have some concerns over our smart MPG's.....ACTUAL MPG's.
This kind of dawned on my today as I was filling up: on our recent trip to KC, our GPS kept telling me that I was traveling about 5-7% SLOWER than my speedo was reading. If this is true, then my MPG's would be off, as the number of miles traveled would be off 5-7% as well. For instance, if I drove 107 mile by my speedo, I may have only traveled 100 miles which, when you factor in the number of gallons used for those 100 miles, your MPG's go DOWN! If I'm getting 40-41 now, maybe I'm only REALLY getting 38.4 MPG's.
Do you think smart 'built in' a 5-7% error on purpose in the speedos to give us a higher fuel economy rating than we actually get?
I believe, at least on older cars, the speed is calculated differently than the miles on the odometer. The speed uses the transmission and wheel diameter to figured out speed and miles on the odometer uses the rotation of the wheel. You can get into a lot of trouble, federal charges. if you are screwing with the odometer where speed is not against law until a cop catches you for speeding.
I have a honda sabre. 1100 cc, so slightely bigger engine. I get between 42 and 48 mpg in it. It all depends on the bike. Sports bikes are bult for performance ( high rpm, high compression, guicker gearing) so they get lower mpg. But my bike being a cruiser doesn't have such a high compression and more relaxed gearing.... still quick in my opinion though. Fast enough for something on two wheel anyway.
I agree with you.....years ago when I was 'allowed' to ride (j/k Sweetie ), my Kawasaki 900 would get about 36mpgs and at the time I thought that was great. I don't think the new bikes, with F.I. and all, have made the same kind of progress that cars have made in the past 20-30 years.
That said, I DO have some concerns over our smart MPG's.....ACTUAL MPG's.
This kind of dawned on my today as I was filling up: on our recent trip to KC, our GPS kept telling me that I was traveling about 5-7% SLOWER than my speedo was reading. If this is true, then my MPG's would be off, as the number of miles traveled would be off 5-7% as well. For instance, if I drove 107 mile by my speedo, I may have only traveled 100 miles which, when you factor in the number of gallons used for those 100 miles, your MPG's go DOWN! If I'm getting 40-41 now, maybe I'm only REALLY getting 38.4 MPG's.
Do you think smart 'built in' a 5-7% error on purpose in the speedos to give us a higher fuel economy rating than we actually get?
Do you still have stock wheels/tires on your car? This is one of the things I've wondered about, when considuring changing wheels. Not only how will that effect any safety as far as the ESP is concerned, but will that throw off gauges such as speed and miles?
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
1 - Kermit
3 - The Street Rod
4 - Split Window Vette
5 - The Veggie VW
, smart aren't all bad. We've got A/C, CD, shelter from rain, air bags, seat belts, a roll cage and the list goes on.
Today
Linear Mode
