Smart Car of America Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
564 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The official fuel consumption figures for the 451 smart in Canada have been released. The nice thing about these numbers is they can be compared directly with figures for other cars that are also for sale in the US.

All values below are 2008 Canadian fuel consumption numbers converted to US mpg:

Vehicle..................City............Highway
smart fortwo............39.8...............49.0
Toyota Yaris............34.1...............42.7
Chevrolet Aveo.........26.4...............39.8
MINI Cooper.............32.2...............43.5
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
Not quite as good as it looks

The official fuel consumption figures for the 451 smart in Canada have been released. The nice thing about these numbers is they can be compared directly with figures for other cars that are also for sale in the US.

All values below are 2008 Canadian fuel consumption numbers converted to US mpg:

Vehicle..................City............Highway
smart fortwo............39.8...............49.0
Toyota Yaris............34.1...............42.7
Chevrolet Aveo.........26.4...............39.8
MINI Cooper.............32.2...............43.5
But when you compare the Canadian results with 2008 EPA numbers you get this:


Canada...............................................................USA EPA 2008

Vehicle..................City............Highway..................City.............Highway

Toyota Yaris............34.1...............42.7..................29 (.85).........36 (.84)
Chevrolet Aveo.........26.4...............39.8..................24 (.90).........34 (.85)
MINI Cooper.............32.2...............43.5..................23 (.71).........32 (.73)
Avg diff = 81.3
smart fortwo............39.8...............49.0..........(est) 32.3...............39.8
smart (excluding Mini).............................................33.8...............41.6

The Mini numbers show a much larger difference. Perhaps the variety of driving styles available? Obviously the difference between the US and Canadian testing is considerable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
564 Posts
Discussion Starter #4 (Edited)
Lewis, there was no mention of what grade of gas is required.

Having said that, Canadian and US vehicle emissions standards have essentially been "harmonized" since 2004, so the engine in the Canadian smart should be in identical in its emissions tuning to that of the US-bound cars. On that basis, I suspect it will call for premium gas.

Of the comparison cars, the MINI uses premium gas, the Yaris and Aveo take regular.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,834 Posts
Are we converting liters per 100km to Miles per Imperial (Canadian) Gallon, or Miles per U.S. Gallon, or is it a direct conversion MP(I)G to MP(US)G? One U.S. gallon = 0.833 Imperial gallon.

2008 smarts have now been "introduced" into the U.S. (as witnessed by my local dealer-to-be). There is a little slack allowed between introduction and when the fuel consumption number have to be turned over to the EPA, one or two months I think. So, we should be getting the EPA's numbers fairly soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
564 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
The Mini numbers show a much larger difference...
Paul, I believe you are using US numbers for the MINI Cooper S, not the regular Cooper. The basic Cooper (118 bhp w/manual transmission) scores 27/36 under the 2008 US rating, which would give ratios of 0.84/0.83. Much more in line with the other vehicles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
564 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Are we converting liters per 100km to Miles per Imperial (Canadian) Gallon, or Miles per U.S. Gallon, or is it a direct conversion MP(I)G to MP(US)G? One U.S. gallon = 0.833 Imperial gallon.
I converted all the Canadian numbers from litres per 100km to miles per US gallon (using US mpg = 235 divided by l/100km).
 

·
Smartmadness.com
Joined
·
1,216 Posts
I would love to believe these numbers will be exact for us. However the 49 MPG on highway does sound nice.
I looked at the November issue of 2008 Consumer Reviews and reports magazine at almost any book store or main food store and it states that the consumption for fuel on the SMART For Two is 38 City and 42 Highway.

What I will do is look up one or two cars listed above and see what the review says about them and then we can know how accurate it may be comparing US data vs Canada's data.

If the SMART will actually get 49MPG I would probably keep this car for ever because that is great MPG thats hard to beat for any gasoline powered car other than desiel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
171 Posts
Paul, I believe you are using US numbers for the MINI Cooper S, not the regular Cooper. The basic Cooper (118 bhp w/manual transmission) scores 27/36 under the 2008 US rating, which would give ratios of 0.84/0.83. Much more in line with the other vehicles.
I compared it to the 2008 base Cooper convertible, not the S. But, you're absolutely right - the fairer comparison is with the revised 2007 base Mini number. I had no idea that the convertible gets much poorer mileage than the hardtop. Why would that be?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
347 Posts
The MINI Cooper convertible is still built on the pre-2007 platform and uses the former engine and 5 speed transmission. The 2007 engine and 6 speed trans are a big improvement for the MINI.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,834 Posts
I looked at the November issue of 2008 Consumer Reviews and reports magazine at almost any book store or main food store and it states that the consumption for fuel on the SMART For Two is 38 City and 42 Highway.
I don’t know how many saw it, but there was a two-part rundown on the smart yesterday on CNN American Morning as part of their “Green Week.” Nothing new and revealing, just some more Schembri talk, but one thing that I did note was Kirin Chetry’s statement that the 40 MPG was “city milage.” I don’t know if that was a mistake to say, but the whole presentation was the smart as a city car. At any rate, Schembri didn’t correct her.

It would seem that there should be a greater spread between city/highway than CR’s 38/42.


I concur that 235 is the correct factor to convert l/100km to MP(US)G.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
580 Posts
I compared it to the 2008 base Cooper convertible, not the S. But, you're absolutely right - the fairer comparison is with the revised 2007 base Mini number. I had no idea that the convertible gets much poorer mileage than the hardtop. Why would that be?

About a 220 pound weight penalty for convertible.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top