Two reviews from the NY Times

[tipo158]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/au...fortwo-la.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/au...fortwo-ny.html

[Schmimbo]

Two more negative articles. Typical. Cars probably werent broken in to get the best gas milage as people are suggesting here in this site. I personally love this car, want this car and now I am at my 1 year anniversary for my reservation and I am expecting another 6 to 10 months wait according to my DDE. Im starting to wonder about many of the key points made by the writers. I feel that they are true after my several test drives at the road shows and dealer test drives for an orphan. With almost a two year wait I am starting to feel like whats the point is accurate. I also feel that after the 2nd and 3rd year unless major changes (Improvements) that this car will be sitting in show rooms collecting dust because too many possibly better options for the tight US dollar might be more appealing. Yes the car is cute, yes it gets attention, yes its a gas saver, yes its still unique (for now). 3 years from now it probably wont be very unique sadly. Much like the bug or mini we see everyday now. These other cars dont appeal to me at all. The smart does, it has for sometime. But the manufacturing wait is absolute torture and is causing me to question my thoughts of my reservation and why it is that I want this car or need this car so much. The fact that others are taking delivery after I made my reservation is driving me nuts. Some people on this board reserved long before me probably the first out of the gate and they still havent got their smart yet is driving me to get pissed. The fact that orphans are going to non reservation holders is really getting under my skin. When I saw articles like this earlier in the game late last year I said (F) U writer what do you know. Now because of the delays for everyone here waiting for a smart I'm really starting to wonder about this car and question what I am doing. Just my 2 cents.

[andywert]

The Times reviews highlight some valid criticisms about the quirky auto-manual trans, leisurely zero-to-sixty time, and the perceived fuel economy not achieving expectations for such a small car. Once you have your own smart, learn its ways, and get past the break-in you will be rewarded with a 35 to 45 mpg small car that is comfortable, safe, and ideally suited for 1 or 2 folks to get around town. The last 2 weeks driving in a suburban setting yielded 37 mpg and an 18.50 fill-up. The Suburban driver next to me at the pump stopped at 75.00. I'll be he was lucky to get 12 mpg. Don't give up hope or believe everything the naysayers trumpet. The smart is a fine small car.

[tverb]

The first news article writer couldn't shift the smart smoothly even though it had a tach. Then, DUH, he probably has never driven a stick shift.

The smart is what it is. A SMALL runabout, great for in town. And the list of things that won't fit was totally off base. It's possible to put EIGHT bags of groceries in the back. We know 'cause we did it. The dropped tailgate is a good idea; it keeps your knees away from a warm engine compartment when loading.

The smart isn't intended to be a Freeway/Autobahn Hauler, even though it can do 90 MPH.
But if it were electronically governed to 55 MPH. What would the press say then?

Fuel economy could be better, but 500 pounds worth (guessing) of "gummint" required safety equipment takes its bite. And again, what would the press write if safety equipment was eliminated to increase MPG? Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

BUT, read some of the "Related Stories". I think the writer is one of us. He mentions his license plate "NOT DUMB".

[factor9]

It drives me crazy that the EPA conducts their gas mileage tests based on today's driving practices (80 mph on the highway and acceleration at 8 miles/sec.) when our smart cars are not designed for that type of driving without really compromising efficiency. So, you'll never see articles that reflect the mileage that many of us achieve by driving at the speed limit and accelerating at a slightly less "put the petal to the metal" pace. With respect to the transmission, once you realize that it actually operates as a manual transmission MINUS THE CLUTCH, then you can shift seamlessly! I'd really be interested how European automotive reporters review the smart fortwo or 451 versus American automotive reporters. Let's face it, Detroit is going to fight the move to cars like the smart as long as they possibly can (or until they can catch up and eliminate inventory).

[SmartBob]

The first article seemed pretty objective to me. After all, the guy had his fortwo for two weeks....not for an hour or two like a lot of other narrow minded reviews. I'll read the other article when I get back from the Super market.

[Karl Roth]

Originally Posted by tipo158

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/au...fortwo-la.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/11/au...fortwo-ny.html

So Tipo your neggotiating skills still haven't gotten you one and you still need to spread venom whenever you can. how sad
karl

[mvukovich]

I get great gas mileage with mine, I am not disappointed with the car. The autoweek guy gave a bad review and after driving it for a month change his mind and gave a great review. Hipo is to fat to fit in the car.

[Smartcar007]

How sad when we have to shoot the messenger because we refuse to accept the truth. The car is just a car it has good points and bad points. It is up to each of us to make our own decision. I would much rather be fully informed from both sides than be shocked by the reality of what the car is and is not.

[Karl Roth]

Originally Posted by Smartcar007

How sad when we have to shoot the messenger because we refuse to accept the truth. The car is just a car it has good points and bad points. It is up to each of us to make our own decision. I would much rather be fully informed from both sides than be shocked by the reality of what the car is and is not.

Have you lived with one?
karl