The automated manual terminology.

[Brand Manager Kamaal]

Originally Posted by Brad09

I wasn't going to weigh in, but having actually had a 1L3C Geo Metro with a 5 speed (for over 120k miles), I'd put it up against my smart any day in terms of performance. I love the smart for what it is, but I consider this transmission a compromise. (albeit one I made willingly, as my driving style has mellowed over the years)

Our Brand Manager Kamaal has one with over 230,000 miles and is a 5 speed stick shift. It's a '94 XFi.

[Brad09]

Originally Posted by Penske_smart_WCovina

Our Brand Manager Kamaal has one with over 230,000 miles and is a 5 speed stick shift. It's a '94 XFi.

So he can confirm what I said. Thanks!

[Stretchmobile]

Originally Posted by Penske_smart_WCovina

There's a big difference between *CAN* shift faster and doing it every single time you drive or encounter a stop and go situation.

If there was a hidden camera in your car, there would be so many times you would be caught in a lazy, "ho-hum" shift. Running from first gear, taking your sweet precious time to clutch then engage second. Just like there are many times the smart will out accelerate Corvettes or Infiniti G37's across the street. Why? Because the guy driving the Corvette or G37 isn't out racing the car every single time he leaves a red light.

There would be many more times showing me short shifting, downshifting to pass, shifting w/o the clutch, heel and toeing coming hard into the corner, preselecting a gear in anticipation for the light turning green, popping the clutch just to light up the tires, skipping gears, holding my place on a hill with the clutch waiting to beat the guy next to me when the road goes from 2 lanes to one. Why? BECAUSE I CAN!. I like to have fun while driving. I like stick shifts (which is why I converted my Mustang from an auto in the first place.) I get a kick out of all the things you can do with a stick. I love my smart, I get a kick out of driving it, parking it listening to it run through the gears. Wouldn't it be awesome if I could combine the two? A smart with a clutch? Wow. Plus, when it wore out from my driving it, I could replace it cheaply! I don't have to reteach my left leg!

[Brand Manager Kamaal]

Originally Posted by Brad09

I wasn't going to weigh in, but having actually had a 1L3C Geo Metro with a 5 speed (for over 120k miles), I'd put it up against my smart any day in terms of performance. I love the smart for what it is, but I consider this transmission a compromise. (albeit one I made willingly, as my driving style has mellowed over the years)

Our Brand Manager Kamaal has one with over 230,000 miles and is a 5 speed stick shift. It's a '94 XFi that was later retrofitted for the air conditioning. He loves little 3 cylinder cars and appreciates the Metro for what it was too.

[Brand Manager Kamaal]

Originally Posted by Brad09

So he can confirm what I said. Thanks!

Sorry about the double post.

The 3 cylinder Metro was definitely capable at in town and normal highway speeds. But there is nothing it could do acceleration wise, or handling wise, that the smart fortwo wouldn't run circles around.

[Brad09]

Well, I won't continue an internet argument. I'll just say my reality differs from yours and bow out of this one.

[larryw4csc]

Now I tell people it has a PLASTIC gear selector drive and a PLASTIC clutch drive.

I'd love to strangle the stupid jerk who made that decision.

[Brand Manager Kamaal]

Originally Posted by Brad09

Well, I won't continue an internet argument. I'll just say my reality differs from yours and bow out of this one.

Careful. Brand Manager Kamaal owns two smarts and a Metro XFi. Does the automated manual transmission bother you enough to distort reality about performance between the two 3 cylinders? He'll break out a list comparing the two.

[Brad09]

OK, this is really my last post on the issue. It does not 'bother' me, I was just giving my honest assessment based on my own experience. I really don't care what someone else owns, I drove them both and that was and is my assessment.

~ FIN ~

[kennyrayandersen]

LOL, reminds me some words of a song: "Blinded by the light"...

1994 was that last year for the 1.0 3 cylinder. The XFi was a high mpg version that traded taller gears for better mpg (slower acceleration). The original Metro only weighed about 1500 pounds, so was lighter than the smart by maybe 300+ pounds.

1994 Geo Metro 0- 60 mph: 14.7 s
1994 Geo Geo Metro 3-Door Hatchback specifications & performance characteristics

the next year the base car had 20 more HP and so would basically smoke a smart (not a fair fight since it had one more cylinder!)

1995 Geo Metro LSi 0-60 mph 12.6
GEO 0-60 Times & GEO Quarter Mile Times | GEO Metro 0-60, Prizm, Tracker and GEO Storm 0 to 60 stats!

2008 smart fortwo: zero to 60 mph in 14.1
2008 smart fortwo

To say the smart would run circles around a 1994 Go metro is kind of silly though -- it'd be a pretty even fight. Also keep pin mind that the Geo is 14 years older than a smart. Some of the difference would obviously be the slow shifting smart...