Official Canadian Fuel Consumption

[MicroNut]

Originally Posted by paul c

...I had no idea that the convertible gets much poorer mileage than the hardtop. Why would that be?

Yes, that is kind of strange. Perhaps they simulate all the extra drag of driving with the top down!

[Old smart]

Originally Posted by Evo8marlon

I looked at the November issue of 2008 Consumer Reviews and reports magazine at almost any book store or main food store and it states that the consumption for fuel on the SMART For Two is 38 City and 42 Highway.

I don’t know how many saw it, but there was a two-part rundown on the smart yesterday on CNN American Morning as part of their “Green Week.” Nothing new and revealing, just some more Schembri talk, but one thing that I did note was Kirin Chetry’s statement that the 40 MPG was “city milage.” I don’t know if that was a mistake to say, but the whole presentation was the smart as a city car. At any rate, Schembri didn’t correct her.

It would seem that there should be a greater spread between city/highway than CR’s 38/42.


I concur that 235 is the correct factor to convert l/100km to MP(US)G.

[Calab]

Originally Posted by MicroNut

I converted all the Canadian numbers from litres per 100km to miles per US gallon (using US mpg = 235 divided by l/100km).

So, what were the original l/100km numbers?

[Arch]

Originally Posted by Calab

So, what were the original l/100km numbers?

Official ratings per Canadian testing standards are...
5.9 L/100km city
4.8 L/100km hwy

Arch

[2smartArizona]

Originally Posted by paul c

I compared it to the 2008 base Cooper convertible, not the S. But, you're absolutely right - the fairer comparison is with the revised 2007 base Mini number. I had no idea that the convertible gets much poorer mileage than the hardtop. Why would that be?

About a 220 pound weight penalty for convertible.