Pete De Lorenzo expands his brief comment from last week...
The travails of Smart reveal some High-Octane Truths for all.
"Right now the Smart brand is dead in the water in the U.S., and that presents a huge problem for Smart dealers across the country - and for Roger Penske. It’s fine that Dieter and his troops are thinking of ways to pump up the Smart ForTwo’s raison d’etre, but in order for Smart to continue to be viable in the U.S., it desperately needs a larger car. Like yesterday."
After seeing Mr. De Lorenzo's latest rant regarding Smart's product, I'm forced to agree the company's a "goner" in the US market.
Smart didn't design or produce an "A-Tier" product to compete against the "fun" competitors, far less the "practical" competitors.
They've dead in the market, and deservedly so. "Gotta bring your A-Game, if you want to play with the big boys."
It's basically "The New Yugo, for the 21st century."
Quote:
Originally Posted by forestacademy
So Basically the US is the only county in the world where smart can't survive without a "large" option.
In a word, "Yes." Telling potential customers, "You're stupid for buying a big car!" isn't likely to generate sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by M. De Lorenzo
You don’t enter this market with a built-in fatal flaw – and believe me, the Smart gearbox is a fatal flaw – and expect to succeed.
+1
The transmission is horrific. Abysmal. Untterly unacceptable and completely intolerable. Mystifying that Daimler would permit such a monstrosity to exist, much less in production, much less with a Daimler brand. Completely baffling!
In comparisons against "fun" competitors, the ForTwo fares so badly (*), it's not even a contest (**):
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWAutos
In fact, the rear-wheel drive, [fun competitor] arguably packs more driving enjoyment into a small, affordable package than any other car on the market. No wonder so many buyers favorably compare its nimble handling and overall character to British roadsters of old.
[..snip...]
But better than those roadsters, the [fun competitor] is a recommended buy of Consumer Reports magazine, with a "very good" reliability rating. [Note: Also a "Most Wanted', "Best Buy" and "Most Reliable" at Edmunds. Repeatedly "Car of the Year" at Motor Trend, Car and Driver and Automobile Magazine, not to mention countless awards from the likes of "Road and Track". Smart SOO needed to bring their "A-Game"!]
Sure, the Smart fortwo convertible has a starting manufacturer's suggested retail price of $17,635 compared with [the competitor's] $22,420.
But the fortwo looks odd, not sporty, and it gets just 70 horsepower out of its one-liter, three-cylinder engine. It's also not offered with a manual transmission.
Meanwhile, the [fun competitor's] 2-liter, four-cylinder engine puts out a credible 167 horses and 140 foot-pound of torque at 5,000 rpm to provide spirited driving that matches the look of the car.
Indeed, the [fun competitor] is the second-lowest priced roadster on the market after the Smart fortwo.
The [fun competitor's] specs don't do the car justice. Drivers have to experience what 140 foot-pounds of torque can do for a soft-top car that weighs less than 2,500 pounds.
It's not just that the [fun competitor] scoots. It pulls forward with gusto and keeps going.
I love working the six-speed manual gear shifter in the [fun competitor]. It's one of the most satisfying and gets even better [every year], with new carbon coating on some synchros for improved gas mileage -- up to 21 miles per gallon in the city and 28 mpg on highways.
[The manufacturer's] engineers pushed the redline upward by 500 rpm to 7,200 rpm, so there's more opportunity for spirited driving. This was no small feat. It required a new forged steel crankshaft, revised pistons, stiffer valve springs and an engine oil cooler, among other things.
The test [competitor's fun car] with manual transmission was adaptable to all driving conditions -- both city traffic and on less-traveled country roads -- without being fussy.
The small-diameter steering wheel fit just right inside the compact interior, and the rack-and-pinion steering responded easily and quickly.
The turning radius is something to behold, too. It's just under 31 feet.
Of course, the [fun competitor] wheeled right into compact parking spaces with nary a care. And it snagged the smallest of curbside parking spots. ones that sport utility vehicles and even Toyota Camry sedans couldn't fit into.
I heard the engine all the time and often found myself cranking up the radio so I could hear it over the rising engine revs. Then, at stoplights, I'd have to turn the volume back down.
Let's leave the product and manufacturer unstated. You already know the make and model, right?
That's just the "A-Game" for a car built for "practical fun", having better performance, storage and reliability, not to mention basically comparable mileage. There's a slew of highly practical competitors, including the "Fit" and "Yaris" mentioned in the article. Also, the Nissan Sentra, Honda Civic, Toyota Corolla and Mazda3 to consider. All are about the same price and same mileage, but are vastly better cars, with more features, better safety, better dealer and service networks, and higher build quality. Competitive products are vastly superior in every regard.
But Smart didn't bring an "A-Tier" product to compete in a really crowded, demanding market.
No wonder Smart is dead in the USA. It's a brutal market, and makes no apologies for ruthlessly slaughtering inferior products.
(**) The "fun competitor" has slaughtered worthy products from every major nameplate for 20 years, including Porsches and BMWs costing twice the price, not to mention Toyotas and Hondas only 30-50% more costly.
That's right 'neon', most, if not all cars aren't selling right now. To put it into perspective:
smart with their dealer network of 75 in the U.S., as I remember seeing, has sold 13,000 units this year so far, down from the 30,000 they delivered in 2008.
Chrysler, on the other hand, with it's dealer network of 2,400, has also sold 13,000 so far this year.
So I ask: Which one do YOU think is in more trouble?
That's right 'neon', most, if not all cars aren't selling right now. To put it into perspective:
smart with their dealer network of 75 in the U.S., as I remember seeing, has sold 13,000 units this year so far, down from the 30,000 they delivered in 2008.
Chrysler, on the other hand, with it's dealer network of 2,400, has also sold 13,000 so far this year.
So I ask: Which one do YOU think is in more trouble?
I still say that 'if' smart doesn't make it in the U.S., it's because they're 'high maintenance'. Not that they need a lot of it, only that it's very costly.
Who ever thought that customers would line up for a 20k service and fork over $400 for an inspection, oil and filter change, cabin filter change and change the brake fluid? FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS?
smart centers, again 'if' they are to survive, will need to rely on parts and service to carry them in these times. Pricing the services so high will only accomplish two things: first, cause customers to service their own vehicles or find an alternative source or second, NOT service them at all.
The second scenario will only hurt smarts image, as these cars will be breaking down and their owners will be on the net posting about 'what a piece of crap they bought', scaring off potential smart buyers.
If smartUSA is listening, they need to drop the prices of their services. It's outrageous.
People with an axe to grind were quick to latch onto the downturn in overall automotive sales, this in order to advance their own agenda. In addition to what's pointed out about the smart above, I have heard no end of "Well, what do you think of Toyota now?", usually delivered with a smirk.
Never mind that all auto sales are in the hopper - any news that All Japan Auto, or Germanautofabriken has fallen in any way comes as good news to this crowd.
Mind you, that doesn't mean that the smart is perfect - far from it. But, let the gas go up again (it's now up by about a quarter of its recent low price earlier this year) and suddenly the smart (with its low purchase price and high mileage numbers starts to look positively perfect.
That's right 'neon', most, if not all cars aren't selling right now. To put it into perspective:
smart with their dealer network of 75 in the U.S., as I remember seeing, has sold 13,000 units this year so far, down from the 30,000 they delivered in 2008.
Chrysler, on the other hand, with it's dealer network of 2,400, has also sold 13,000 so far this year.
So I ask: Which one do YOU think is in more trouble?
Is that Chrysler sales number across all models?
If it is, then smart selling the same number with only 1 model is not to shabby in this economy. But since Penski planned on 30K a year, it ain't great either
Auto Sales - Markets Data Center - WSJ.com
Ok Looking at these numbers (smart not listed) Chrysler is not in as bad of shape as BP states, but some other with larger networks than smart are.
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 - LT N FLFY
2 - Forests ride
3 - Little Blue
4 - Big Red
2010 Smart 
Today
Linear Mode
