I think many people believe the SMART should get even better milage.. 5th on the list for a car that is 1/2 the size? for one with a 1.0l motor (the hybrids have 1.5-1.6l motors, the TDI is a 2.0l motor). Plus the others can carry 4-5 people and luggage.
I've had several people say that they could get a Prius and get the same milage. Then I note that for the price of their one Prius, I can get two smarts. That's the sticking point. Yes, we get about the same as the big hybrids on the market, but we do it at half the price, and the $10K I save buys and aweful lot of gas.
1. 2009 Smart Fortwo Convertible and Smart Fortwo Coupe
These cars get 33mpg city and 41 mpg highway. They use 9. 5 barrels of petroleum a year and only emit 5.1 tons of CO2. Check out the upcoming electric drive smart fortwo.
2. Pontiac Solstice
This car gets 19 mpg city and 28 mpg highway. It uses 15.6 barrels of petrol a year and produces 8.3 tons of CO2.
3. Saturn Sky
The Saturn Sky gets 19 mpg city and 28 highway. It also consumes 15.6 barrels of petrol and produces 8.3 tons of CO2 annually.
I've had several people say that they could get a Prius and get the same milage. Then I note that for the price of their one Prius, I can get two smarts. That's the sticking point. Yes, we get about the same as the big hybrids on the market, but we do it at half the price, and the $10K I save buys and aweful lot of gas.
The new Insight should come in right between the Smart and Prius for price.
I've had several people say that they could get a Prius and get the same milage. Then I note that for the price of their one Prius, I can get two smarts. That's the sticking point. Yes, we get about the same as the big hybrids on the market, but we do it at half the price, and the $10K I save buys and aweful lot of gas.
Exactly, and that's why I picked a smart over a Prius. Even for math challenged me, it was a no brainier which was a better deal.
from the article: According to the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, it will cost carmakers approximately $3,000 per car in new technology to get the fleet average up to 35 mpg.
I love it when people say "it will cost the industry" as if somehow these laws were going to result in anonymous corporations absorbing $3,000 per vehicle.
Newsflash: these $3,000 will be either:
(a) Passed on to consumers; or,
(b) In the current climate, subsidized by taxpayers.
Either way, it is the consumer who will pay for the new mileage requirements.
Which is no big deal, except if the consumer happens to be a poor person.
3 types of lies out there.. Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics! ;)
I must have missed in one of those links about the efficient cars.. how many miles per year are they basing that petroleum consumption on?
Price comparisons aside, I still think the smart should get better mileage than it does, when one considers the 1980 econobox cars were pulling in the same ratings. The Smart is an even smaller car (footprint wise) and only gets back to the same mileage one could buy 20 years ago. Admittedly the Smart is "trendier" and likely safer overall.. but this thread is about mileage, no?
As for price, sure it takes a huge amount of miles for one to have the hybrid come out the "cheaper" purchase.. some early buyers got huge tax breaks for instance which offset a bulk of the purchase price difference between say a Prius and a Corolla. Some early Hybrid users got to use HOV lanes (which saves time and money) etc. But yes, they do face a cost issue. Its been mentioned Toyota has lost huge amounts of money bringing the Prius to market.. but when you build a lot of profit ladden SUV's and Pick Ups, you can afford to do it ;)
The next 10 years will be very interesting to watch as the "greens" have finally taken hold now in the US. I like how in the presidents recent "mileage goal" he also has asked that the states be allowed to set mileage/emmissions standards. How annoying is that for a manufacturer to sell in the US to have to check the rules of all 50 states vs ONE US rule. Ugh.
I get a calculated 29mpg, per tank, over the last 58,000 miles with my 2.5L VW jetta, 5spd, 4-door, 3200lb sedan. I wish it got more, but I couldn't afford a TDI My wives "piggy van" has averaged 18.8mpg, over 43,000 miles. Ugh. Talk about a gas hog!
"Price comparisons aside, I still think the smart should get better mileage than it does, when one considers the 1980 econobox cars were pulling in the same ratings."
Since the '80s cars have been saddled with so much to make them cleaner, i.e. cat converter, air pump, fuel injection, etc. along with safety features, that it's impossible to do a straight mileage to mileage comparison by products that are 20+ years apart in manufacture.
I used to drive a 1969 Datsun 1500 pickup that routinely managed to get 32 mpg and it had 110k miles on it. But there was no converter, no fuel injection and all to make it a cleaner vehicle. And the power was such that it could barely get out of it's own way, requiring most of an on ramp to reach the freeway speed of 60.
I think the smart does very well considering it's size and engine.
Using your comparison, why aren't US Automakers offering cars that get 45 mpg? They've had the same 19/25 rating forever, it seems, truly stuck in a rut. They've put the $$ on larger, more expensive (to buy) gas hogs. And now the pigeons have come home to roost. And no one wants to buy them . . . so the taxpayers have to bail them out.
Thank you. I was about to say the same thing. Hybrids and Diesels are different breeds from a gas powered car. The Smart is powered by premiunm unleaded, and BTW there are those who say having to buy the high grade stuff is not so economical. My thought on that is look at the whole picture. Sure the Smart requires preimium fuel to run the car, but you have a smaller tank, and it will last a good long time. You still spend less money to fill er up than on an average 10 gallon tank car.
The Smart still impresses me anytime i take it out on the road.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Marshall
You're comparing apples & oranges in so many different ways.
I've had several people say that they could get a Prius and get the same milage. Then I note that for the price of their one Prius, I can get two smarts. That's the sticking point. Yes, we get about the same as the big hybrids on the market, but we do it at half the price, and the $10K I save buys and aweful lot of gas.
That's exactly why I bought my smart. I have a Prius & some day I'm going to have to replace it. When that day comes, I'll replace it with another Prius or similar car. But by buying a fortwo for half my mileage, my Prius will now last twice as long & that replacement Prius is now a lot farther off.
In effect, my fortwo is that 2nd Prius but for half the price. There are times when the fortwo is too small for what's needed, so it would never work as our first car, but it's a perfect 2nd car.
Price comparisons aside, I still think the smart should get better mileage than it does, when one considers the 1980 econobox cars were pulling in the same ratings. The Smart is an even smaller car (footprint wise) and only gets back to the same mileage one could buy 20 years ago. Admittedly the Smart is "trendier" and likely safer overall.. but this thread is about mileage, no?
EPA states repeatedly that mileage estimates are only to be used for comparison purposed & that actual mileage will vary. This is easily overlooked.
First of all, EPA changed its formula for calculating mileage from 2007 to 2008. By the new system, smarts get 33 city, 41 highway. By the old system, they get 40 & 45. That's important to keep in mind when making comparisons with cars from 20 years ago.
It's also worth noting that EPA's combined mileage estimate for any car (smart = 36 mpg)is bases on an assumption of 55% city & 45% highway driving. Want to improve your mpg? Reverse that "assumption" to 55 highway & 45 city and you'll be up to 37 mpg. An assumption is all it is. If you do 85% highway driving, your combined mpg will be up to 39.
We also need to look at EPA's definition of "highway." They mean an average driving speed of 48 mph with a top driving speed of 60 mph. sound like "highway" driving to you?
I also think that EPA underestimated smart's mpg. Both Consumer Reports & Consumer Guide got better mileage by about 10% than EPA. That was the biggest difference between CR & EPA. If anything, CR gets worse mpg than EPA on its auto tests. For them to get so much better & to have it repeated by CG is very unusual.
What actual users report is also important. I bought a Prius instead of a Honda Civic Hybrid partly because Civic users who posted reported that their mpg in actual usage was much worse than EPA estimates whereas Prius dirvers found EPA estimates to be spot on. In the case of smart, most users seem to report better mpg than EPA.
It was very unusual to get 40 mpg from cars in the '80's. I could get 40 mpg from my Mitsubishi Mirage but that was only on long trips of straight highway driving. I think that in real world driving the fortwo is getting significantly better mileage than those old cars ever got.
Last edited by Bill Marshall; 01-27-2009 at 09:16 PM.
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
My wives "piggy van" has averaged 18.8mpg, over 43,000 miles. Ugh. Talk about a gas hog!
2008 Smart Pure
Today
Linear Mode
