Smart Car of America Forum banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Moderator
Joined
·
17,350 Posts
Hopefully whatever needs to be done to ready it for the US market doesn't murder that number.

Toyota is gearing for a 60 MPG Prius, so soon enough 50 MPG won't be a big deal, just like how 40 isn't anymore.

That said, I wonder what the highway number is? :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,476 Posts
I'm excited about those numbers, too, but remember that they would be based on the European test cycle.

Does anyone know what the current smart gets on the European test cycle? If so, we could extrapolate an approximate US-based MPG figure.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
17,350 Posts
I'm excited about those numbers, too, but remember that they would be based on the European test cycle.

Does anyone know what the current smart gets on the European test cycle? If so, we could extrapolate an approximate US-based MPG figure.
From the UK site:

  • Fuel consumption in l/100 km:
    Urban cycle[3]
    Coupé/cabrio: 4.5/4.6 (softip); 4.6/4.7 (softouch)



  • Fuel consumption in l/100 km:
    Extra-urban cycle[3]
    Coupé/cabrio: 3.9/4.0 (softip); 4.0/4.1 (softouch)



  • Fuel consumption in l/100 km:
    Combined cycle[3]
    Coupé/cabrio: 4.2/4.3 (softip); 4.3/4.4 (softouch)

 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
17,350 Posts
The 999cc petrol engine with mhd.

Unfortunately, the 999cc isn't offered without the mhd in any English speaking country but the US, so that's as close as we're going to get.
 

·
To the XCAPEPOD!
Joined
·
6,076 Posts
So, on the combined Euro cycle, the 451 and 453 are pretty much the same and if you extrapolate that to the US, then we're looking at very similar numbers as well. Maybe it will go back to 40-41 MPG on the EPA like the 2008, but that's still disappointing.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the official EPA numbers are, but I won't hold my breath for 50.

By the way, just use Google to translate the figures to MPG. Enter it as follows:

"4.1 l/100km in miles per US gallon"
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
28,241 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
As an aside, Eric Angeloro (smartusainsider.com) indicated the US would get all powertrain combinations - hope he is right. That should keep smart busy for the next year getting the EPA certifications. :)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
28,241 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
It does now apparently - it didn't when Mercedes stonewalled the other 451 powertrains. :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,593 Posts
As an aside, Eric Angeloro (smartusainsider.com) indicated the US would get all powertrain combinations - hope he is right. That should keep smart busy for the next year getting the EPA certifications. :)
Based on smartUSA's roll out of ED, two power trains through EPA certification in a year may be wishful thinking?

Where's Waldo, oops Webster (smartUSA Commander and Chief?) when we need him to make a pronouncement?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
17,350 Posts
So, on the combined Euro cycle, the 451 and 453 are pretty much the same and if you extrapolate that to the US, then we're looking at very similar numbers as well. Maybe it will go back to 40-41 MPG on the EPA like the 2008, but that's still disappointing.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the official EPA numbers are, but I won't hold my breath for 50.

By the way, just use Google to translate the figures to MPG. Enter it as follows:

"4.1 l/100km in miles per US gallon"
Thankfully that's just for one engine/transmission combination. Let's hope this engine isn't the most efficient.

It would kinda suck if they did all this R&D and couldn't get the engine to get better fuel economy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
MPG is not where it should be today

I'm know I will get some flack for this, I know the EPA regulations and problems the Geo had, but I have to interject. I remember back in 1991 I bought a brand new Geo Metro. Do you know back then I was averaging 52 MPG? Whenever I would drive freeway only I would get 57, that's 57!!!! This was way back 23 years ago. It just irritates me to hear all this hoopla today about 30, 40, and 50. Think about it, 52 MPG in 1991! Car makers today should be ashamed to brag about 40.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
465 Posts
I'm know I will get some flack for this, I know the EPA regulations and problems the Geo had, but I have to interject. I remember back in 1991 I bought a brand new Geo Metro. Do you know back then I was averaging 52 MPG? Whenever I would drive freeway only I would get 57, that's 57!!!! This was way back 23 years ago. It just irritates me to hear all this hoopla today about 30, 40, and 50. Think about it, 52 MPG in 1991! Car makers today should be ashamed to brag about 40.
MY '80 Audi 5000 Diesel got 45mpg on the highway at 80mph+. My '72 Honda 600 got between 45 + 55 mpg. 36-38 from my '86 Ford Ranger diesel. Hybrids don't impress me. 2 different drivetrains to get similar mileage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
208 Posts
I'm know I will get some flack for this, I know the EPA regulations and problems the Geo had, but I have to interject. I remember back in 1991 I bought a brand new Geo Metro. Do you know back then I was averaging 52 MPG? Whenever I would drive freeway only I would get 57, that's 57!!!! This was way back 23 years ago. It just irritates me to hear all this hoopla today about 30, 40, and 50. Think about it, 52 MPG in 1991! Car makers today should be ashamed to brag about 40.
You have to remember that the Geo Metro XFI, the version that got the best MPG's, weighed 1,620 lbs. Yes, even though it was a considerably larger car than a smart it still weighed hundreds of pounds less. It didn't have air bags, crumple zones, and lots of other things that cars are required or that customers demand they have today. It isn't surprising at all that cars could get better gas mileage back then.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top