The SMART CAR OF AMERICA community is a social utility that connects you with fellow smart enthusiasts.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
The cars we're driving now, minus the US safety and emission stuff, were released in Europe in 2007, so my bet is the Autocar guys tested the 451 that's essentially what we're driving now. At least all the changes they mention seem to match what's on our cars. But, I could be wrong.
The second New York Times article mentioned the Honda Fit as being a better choice. In late 2006 we bought a new 2007 Honda Fit base model, it get 33-34 MPG around town and 40-41 on long all highway trips. We have had our Smart for 3 weeks, so far in combination driving the average MPG has been 38. The purchase cost differential between the Fit base model with automatic and the Passion was around $500. My wife prefers the automatic in the Fit and I prefer the Smart because I like to drive something different than the rest of the rat race. For us, this is a good combination of vehicles. No doubt the Fit is a great little car, hopefully I will be able to say the same thing about the Smart after driving it a year.
"Here’s what you won’t be hauling in the Smart’s hatch: a cart full of groceries, a guitar case, golf bag or two medium suitcases....
from NYT Article
Well I have put a full cart of groceries, and an electric gutiar in its case; and a folding bicycle and the guitar at the same time (together with two backpacks!!!!
The bill’s centerpiece, negotiated over the weekend by House leaders, is the first meaningful increase in fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks, including S.U.V.’s, in more than 30 years. The provision would raise average fuel economy standards from 25 miles per gallon today to 35 miles per gallon in 2020.
Success would earn them the gratitude of a country that badly needs a rational energy strategy.
NYT: we applaud politicians who force us to drive cars that do 35 MPG
NYT: we hate cars that do 35 MPG. Companies that manufacture such cars must be evil and willing to torture innocent consumers with tiny, uncomfortable, unsafe cars.
What a cheap hypocritical rag. This is why we cancelled our subscription.
Legislation is never a morally legitimate answer to any problem; and its practical value is usually nil, negative, or negated by the additional problems it causes.
The NYT is an anti-Liberty rag, and those two reviews of the smart car were idiotic. Not surprisingly in a liberal venue, one of the implicit premises of both reviews was a desire to get something for nothing. The reviewers complained about poor fuel mileage and poor acceleration. The U.S. version of the smart car is a compromise. It is a 1,800-pound car driven by a 71-horsepower internal combustion engine. This combination is almost identical to that of the original Volkswagen Golf/Rabbit, which was considered quick in its day (even eliciting the term “pocket rocket” from some reviewers, despite its poor handling compared to the original Mini and Mini-Cooper on which its design was roughly based).
There has been a constant escalation of expectations in terms of automobile performance, similar to that connected with the power of sporting rifles since the advent of smokeless powder. But while it is possible to make a standard internal combustion motor-car with either extremely high performance or extremely high fuel mileage, it is impossible to have both characteristics in the same vehicle. I think that the U.S. smart is a reasonable compromise, though I would be happy to see less power and higher fuel mileage, since the smart will never be the equivalent of an original Mini-Cooper S (nor was it intended to be, and nor should it be). I have driven my 1962 850cc Mini (1,250 pounds, 34BHP, 0-60MPH in 30 seconds) on expressways and interstate highways, with no trouble or sense of danger in entering or in cruising along for hours at the top speed of 80MPH on flat sections.
I think that common expectations in many areas have become unreasonable and unrealistic. It is amazing how people expect to defy reality, as if wanting or wishing it could make it happen.
Ouch, that was the worst review yet... This guy obviously likes his SUVs... His wife too... What's the saying, Ya love them or hate them... I guess that applies to the smart too.
Today
Linear Mode
