Sad to see the article give such prominence to the mindless Insurance Institute "drive a small car and you're going to DIE" drivel.
The time worn "You can't repeal the laws of physics" line particularly irks me. I'm sure as media relations director, the guy has a real good grasp of the laws of physics.
A Formula One racecar weighs 500kg, yet can protect its driver in a collision at immense speed with immovable objects. The difference between it and a regular car boils down to the application of technology and money (admittedly in F1, staggeringly large amounts of money).
But even on a practical level, small cars are much safer now than they were 10 years ago, and yet the laws of physics have not changed.
The worst part of all about the IIHS argument is that cars must forever get heavier and heavier, year after year, forever. And that simply is not a logically tenable position.
"I don't know if I'd want to be on the [highway] doing 60 miles an hour and have a car run into me," another said. Gee, this person doesn't know if they want to be hit on the highway? Gosh, I thought most people wanted that whether big car or small.
I hope the insurance rates for this car are not going to be out of control--the Insurance Institute's mouthpiece is not making it sound too good.
I hope the insurance rates for this car are not going to be out of control--the Insurance Institute's mouthpiece is not making it sound too good.
I called my insurance company (GMAC) trying to get an idea of cost and they had no idea. The person I talked to googled the smart to see what it was, and then went off for about 10 minutes trying to find somebody in the office who could help. The final response was that if I could give them a manufacturer name, model, and VIN they could put it into their computer and generate a quote but without those 3 items they cannot even give a ballpark figure...
The last time I was in talking to our State Farm representative, I asked her if they had any numbers yet on the smart cars. They did, all three models. When I asked her about what our rates would be, she said it would be about $48 a month more than what our '97 Dodge Neon is now, which puts the rate at $263 every 6 months. She said that the Insurance Rating number on that was one of the lowest ones she has seen. I belive that was at 17 or 19; in that range. She said the highest ones are sporty convertibles, and they are rated around 33 or 35, the lower numbers being better. Age-wise, we both check in at 50, FWIW.
Yeah, that's one problem right now that will persist. Those who think they are in *the know* will spout out (rant) this and that and readers will be steered astray by that kind of idiocy. As stated above, noone in any kind of car would want to be hit at 60 mph on the highway... yeah...that's the logic we all need...keep those vehicles large, heavy and sooooooo safe!! I was absolutely appalled to read that article. Totally out of touch with reality.
I hope the insurance rates for this car are not going to be out of control--the Insurance Institute's mouthpiece is not making it sound too good.
It may not be that bad. Most of the coverage underwritten is to cover the other guy's property and medical damages if you are found at fault in an accident. I don't see where a smart would be that much more of a risk to someone else unless there were a history of them flying through the windshield, like hitting a deer. The part where they may see risk to their own insurred is Personal Injury Protection (PIP), usually not a big part of the policy, and not even included in some states.
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.
Today
Linear Mode
