A journalist (not connected with the NYT) friend of mine from NY alerted me about the articles. Here is my anser (to the articles). He urged me to post it here. So, voilà:
"Thanks for the link to smart in the eyes of Eric Taub, Lawrence Ulrich. Dave Kinney, Daniel McDermon and William Diem.
As most reviews we (members of the Forum) have seen recently, those five articles tend to diminish the advantages and zero-in on the (apparent) quirks, shortcomings and flaws.
"The smart IS a compromise with a new approach: a diminutive (thereby inevitably somewhat bumpy and stiff) URBAN new angle to private transportation. Realistically it IS lateral wind challenged. But it IS safe!
"It has ample room for two and some luggage, not more than one could, or should, take on a plane trip. But its intelligent use of space still allows it to be the shortest car around. (Even you had to recall that it needs an engine, somehow, somewhere!*)
The latter is (surprise!) small, though more than adequate for stop-and-go traffic and some go-cart like hill and curve gymkhana behavior. Speaking of gymkhana, think potholes.
The transmission has a different split-personality, which explains that testers - who, more often than not, drive standard americanized "aim forward and let it drive you" cars - find themselves at loss with something very out-of-the-box.
To complain the smart has unexpectedly bad mileage for such a half-pint vehicle has been said often, but is unfair: the consumption remains the lowest of any non-hybrid! A car MPG is not proportionate to its length.
"In today's traffic, size does matter, but not in the direction reactionaries would think!
Thinking "out of the box" is not easy when manufacturers still aim for more; more power, more gadgets, more seats, more oomph, more glitter, more everything. Is it what educated consumers will want with $4+/g. gas?
[I was going to put something about how many SUV bear "for sale" signs nowadays, but decided to abstain in view of your "new" Audi.**]
Off the soapbox!"
* My friend realized only recently that it's a rear engine car...
** He just bought a 2001 Audi Allroad Quattro AWD station wagon...
Right now after driving it a full week. I really don't care what any reviewer say. I usually drive alone. If I need space I got plenty other cars I can use. It beats any of the Audi's gas mileage so I'm still saving money, I get more smiles than if I was driving a boring Yaris. Parking really isn't an issue for where I live. To me it's a disposable toy. And when I'm done playing with it, I can move on to a different car knowing I didn't pay over 30 something dollars for my fun.
Couldn't have said it better myself, except switch Audi for Land Rover!
It's perfect for me, and I've come to realize it's not perfect for everyone, especially people who want "everything" with their cars. I don't need more room, 38 mpg (what I'm averaging) is fine with me and waaaaaaay better than what I was getting in my Land Rover. I just put away $120 worth of Costco in in yesterday, with room to spare
Yesterday I was also at a stoplight with a Yaris, a Fit and a Versa.... Guess what car everyone was looking at?
Couldn't have said it better myself, except switch Audi for Land Rover!
It's perfect for me, and I've come to realize it's not perfect for everyone, especially people who want "everything" with their cars. I don't need more room, 38 mpg (what I'm averaging) is fine with me and waaaaaaay better than what I was getting in my Land Rover. I just put away $120 worth of Costco in in yesterday, with room to spare
Yesterday I was also at a stoplight with a Yaris, a Fit and a Versa.... Guess what car everyone was looking at?
I've only driven the car twice, but i have to say that the thing that is giving me the most pause is the transmission. I really wish it was a standard manual. I don't get why they have to use this weird trans that is different from all others (wouldn't a CVT be more smooth and simple?)
My last car was a '69 Mini so I'm ready for something modern.....now if the damned thing would just arrive......(June 26th is taking too long!)
Probably looking at each other somewhat dumbfounded..
I make it a habit to cream everyone off the line actually, especially because everyone expects me to putt-putt off the line... Probably contributes to my only getting 38mpg...hehe
I might be the only one that LOVES the transmission, it's like driving a stick without the pain of the clutch
My response to the NYT article, and others, about tranny and comparo to other very small vehicles is well captured by the Autocar article a posted added to this thread:
"Use auto mode to drift about town, and you’ll hardly ever notice the “nodding-dog” problems of old. Change with the lever when driving harder, and you’ll actually enjoy the performance. The ‘box even blips nicely on downchanges."
"Though they've greatly improved a very flawed car, the 2007 tweaks won’t prevent people who don’t understand the Smart concept from continuing to blame the little car for lacking the road ability of a conventional family hatchback. For those who do though, the Smart Fortwo is now a really enticing – and a much less compromised – option."
I guess I will have to be the contrarian here. I can't understand why they would take a chance introducing such a tiny car with a transmission that needs such pampering and explaination. Sure you can "learn" to love it, sure it can "learn" to drive better than it does at delivery, but really, if this car does not do well here the transmission will be 100% to blame. One should not be compelled to make all the excuses I have read here for why the tranny is so peculiar, not on something so fundamental to the driving experience.
I will add my 2 cents on the transmission/shifting.
I work on very expensive cars for a living ,,with lets call them "F-1" style transmissions , the cost is anywhere from 150k to 350k for the run of the mill units,and would you believe you hear the same things about the transmissions in those cars. IE "its hard to take off" ,why does it pause when it shifts" ect. ect.
allot of buyers, they will opt for the 3 pedal car, just because they do not want an f-1 style box. (and most woman get freaked out by paddle shift cars<no offense>) yes they shift in 60 -100 ms , but its the same story. i crack up when you hear people whine on the smart trans... it is not bad.... just different.. true there is no selection to opt for a 3 pedal car with smart, but my feeling is why they did what they did on the gearbox is so people would not kill them.. be honest if you had a clutch you would be trying to burn rubber and do all kinds of wild stuff , i would . i think they did this on purpose to make the car live as long as they could.
how many cars out there use this kind of set up.....>? not many and ones that do are very high end... be happy you have what you have.
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.
"the car", "la voiture"
, i would 
Today
Linear Mode
