Solve real business challenges on Google Cloud and run workloads for free. For Slashdot users: Get $300 in free credits to fully explore Google Cloud. Get started for free today.
An anonymous reader writes "ZAP'sSmart Car has officially been approved by the EPA for sale in the United States. From the article: 'It was the last major regulatory hurdle the company faced.' Finally a 60 mpg car that can go 90 mph and look cool at the same time!!"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Hmm.. considering the rampant drunk driving, carjackings, "fishing"-style robberies (robbers standing on a bridge that goes over a motorway in order to be able to pick off cars by means of a well aimed throw of a suitably sized concrete block) etc. etc. neither would I.
hehe.. out of curiosity - can you get them with white walled tyres? guess you could fit a good dozen of ppl in it and call it a taxi!;-)
But I was under the impression that these things dont really happen that often in the US.. or..?/m
A friend with a BMW Isetta [cqql.net] (the little one, not the bloated 600cc version) gets tickets in San Francisco for parking perpendicular to the curb, never mind the fact that the car is designed for it. Until the cops are clued, the law doesn't matter as long as paying a parking ticket is less costly than fighting it, if your time is worth anything.
A friend with a BMW Isetta (the little one, not the bloated 600cc version) gets tickets in San Francisco for parking perpendicular to the curb, never mind the fact that the car is designed for it.
Isetta. Now that's a scary car. There's no crush space at all in those things, and the handling is horrible - especially the smaller 3-wheeled version. But they're a fun car - I'd love to have one because the BMW logo on it would piss off snobs.
Until the cops are clued, the law doesn't matter as long as paying
Actually in the US it varies from state to state. The state's have different laws when it comes to driving/roads/etc. That's why the speed limit is different in different states. That's also why it is easy to get a driver's license in some states and harder in others.
Also, on the stability issue, Stirling Moss has one and loves it....and for all those of you who don't know, Stirling Moss is a (retired) racing driver, so he should have some idea of what makes a good car.
We have one and regularly go 90 mph on the motorways here. It's fab. The only reason they don't go more than 90 is that they have a speed limiter. You can get them chipped however... http://www.smarttune.co.uk/tuning.htm [smarttune.co.uk]
Just wait until someone gets in a head on collision with an SUV (most of them are nearly 3 times the weight of these cars -- The driver of the SUV feels almost nothing, the accident investigators wonder what kind of car was even in the crash.
OK, here's the thing: if two SUVs hit each other head-on, everyone dies. You are arguing that a disadvantage of the SMART car is that if you get involved in a fatal car accident, you don't get te satisfaction of taking the other guy out with you?
Americans are strange.
I wouldn't be on that. In fact a program called "Top Gear" recently tested this very car in a collision test with a concrete wall at 70mph. The wall was angled at around 10 degs from perpendicular, so the Smart car slammed into it and then slid off to the side. Although any occupants would indeed be killed in such a collision, it would be due to the deceleration forces, and not any problems with the car's structure. It's specifically designed to transmit the energy of a crash up through the (surprisingly strong) roof and underfloor sections. In the test, the roof glass remained intact, and the passenger side door was still operational!
They performed the same crash test with another normal family car (I think it was some vauxhaul) and it faired no better than the Smart.
That the collision would be between two very different cars is the important thing. It would be important in america, more and more people there are buying bigger and bigger cars. This is different from europe -- people there are more likely to own smaller cars.
We do have a lot more automotive diversity here (North America, not just the USA) than in Europe. In the US, there's more of a do-it-yourself spirit than I find in either Canada or Europe - Americans tend to enjoy working with their hands. This me
I saw the result of a head-on between an SUV and a BMW Zx (1? 3? can't remember) about seven years ago. The BMW was so low to the ground that the SUV used it as a ramp, went airborne, flipped over, landed on its roof and killed the driver.
I'm not talking about crumple zones. I know how they work. I'm talking about the fact that SUV frames are stiff and they tend to fold on impact killing the people inside the car. Not the engine compartment or the fenders, the structural beams under the car. Because they are classified as trucks and not passenger cars they are not required to meet the same safety requirements and they don't.
People are buying SUVs to be a bit safer than the average car in a crash. So now everybody's gotta get one to stay safe.
Then some people start to drive small trucks to stay safer than the average SUV in a crash. So now everybody's gotta have one to be safe.
Where does it end? Everyone driving 18-wheelers?
Tax private use of larger vehicles. Either through petrol(gas) tax, road tax, purchase tax, take your pick!
In countries where it's more expensive to drive huge vehicles, people chosoe smaller ones. The average car is lighter, more efficient, and better for the environment. And people in smaller cars (or pedestrians) are in less danger in a crash. Just look at the cars in an average city in Europe!
But then again I dont actually remember seeing a bend on a US highway.
hahahha, now that's funny!
What isn't funny, is that curves in the highway aren't necessary to require swerving, although I periodically hear about someone taking an exit ramp or turn too quickly.
IIRC, I've seen three SUVs roll...
two were Explorers, one was a Rover of some type.
all three were avoiding a collision, one was avoiding a stolen car chase.
all ended up on their tops
one rolled several times, lost its top completely, and spread bodies and toys across the dry highway.
one merely slid/spun on its top, and remained on the wet highway.
one rolled onto a concrete divider (12 inches wide?), slicing the cab in half.
Then, there was the Jeep Cherokee which exploded after a rear-end collision, immolating a family of 3, and the SUV of some type which tried to drive a 270 ramp at 50mph, and exploded in the trees. I didn't see those, but they do happen.
SUV's do not win in accidents. They don't stop and push the other car out of the way, they push the other car down and ramp over it. The center of gravity is much too high--usually 6 inches to a foot above the bumper, which is already high enough to pass over the bumpers of most passenger cars, initiating the ramp effect.
There is even a good chance of this happening with a Smart Car. As the bumper of the SUV compresses the front end, the front end and cage of the little car will become a ramp, the tires will blow or the axles collapse, and the car will be locked in place by the sheer friction of the weight of both vehicles plus the force of lifting the SUV. The Smart Car will stop abruptly, which is bad, but the SUV will become a tumbling death trap, with 2 to 4 tons of vehicle crushing the heads of its occupants like overripe grapes.
Trust me, stopping is better than tumbling. Accidents aren't about winning. It's about how you stop. SUV's don't, and that's the problem. Even the people that make them admit that SUV's are more dangerous than standard passenger cars.
Just wait until someone gets in a head on collision with an SUV (most of them are nearly 3 times the weight of these cars -- The driver of the SUV feels almost nothing
Just wait until that crappy SUV gets in a head on collision with a Freightliner. [freightlinertrucks.com] Only a moron would drive anything smaller than a Freightliner. Good thing the Liebherr [liebherr.com] isn't licensed for onroad use, or we'd all have to drive one of them.
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Friday November 26, 2004 @11:35AM (#10924707)
i rented the smart 4four recently, it has 4 seats which makes it actually useful and it was no problem at all to go over 190 km/h on the autobahn.
that should be fast enough for most US drivers...
it looks weak but drives surprisingly well, it's full with electronics to keep it stable - and it really feels like it.
I was given one of these as a replacement car when mine was being serviced. I took it out on the motorway round Brussels and while it's a lot like driving a hair dryer it is suprisingly comfortable. I wouldn't want to do any long motorway trips in one though, but then that really isn't what the designers intended either. I'd have preferred a manual gearbox (smart forfour is the only smart with this as an option) but that won't be an issue in the US.
One thing I noticed is nobody, and I mean absolutely nobody, can stand being overtaken by one of these.
The main motoring TV program in the UK, Top Gear [bbc.co.uk] recently showed crash tests involving the SMART car, which is designed with a one piece, very strong passenger shell. The car stood up very well in these tests.
One of the tests shown was an offset head on impact with a Mercedes S-class. Can't recall the speeds, but the combined speed was high. The front of the s-class was seriously smashed in by the smart car. The front of the smart car too was a mess BUT crucially the passenger compartment of the smart was intact and the occupants would have escaped serious injury.
However, because the passenger shell of the SMART car is so strong and stiff, some tests have shown high passenger loads due to restraints. No doubt due to the small crumple zones on the vehicle.
So I guess if you hit something in a SMART, hit something with a crumple zone that you can share!
by Anonymous Coward writes:
on Friday November 26, 2004 @09:39AM (#10923841)
In Europe we've seend this cars since probably 5 years ago. Right now there are getting popular the new SMART FORFOUR, which offers 4 places in an also reduced space. I think here it was distributed together with either BMW or Mercedes. Haven't heard anything about that "ZAP" thing...
In Europe we've seend this cars since probably 5 years ago. Right now there are getting popular the new SMART FORFOUR, which offers 4 places in an also reduced space.
Yeah, they've been around in the UK for five years now and they're still not that common (and I get to see both the South East's countryside and London).
That's not to say they're bad cars - they're basically two-seat Mercedes A-classes, I think, and I was impressed with the A-class when work hired me one. But I'd want more room.
Yeah, I've seen them around, for some reason they really appeal to me. I have a feeling they'll be cult classics in the future like the original Mini and VW Beetle are today. I know I certainly wouldn't say no if anyone offered me one.
Mercedes is actually Mercedes-Benz, which was a part of Daimler-Benz, which merged with Chrysler corporation to make Daimler-Chrysler. So Maybach, Mercedes, Chrysler, and Dodge cars all come from the same parent corporation. (Don't ask about Ford, they're even worse.)
In fact, it's a joint venture between Daimler-Benz and Swatch (yes, the watch makers), IIRC.
It's got Mercedes technology under the hood, and the design is from Swatch ( check http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/pw/05smartc abriolet.htm [canadiandriver.com] for the new cabriolet version)
The FourTwo is OK, but I just got myself one of these babies [thesmart.co.uk].. a Smart Roadster Couple Brabus. Pretty much all of the fuel ecomomy and a top speed of 120mph. Sorted. Oh yes, you cant't get them in North America for at least a couple of years.. heheh:)
This "beer can" has a watercooled turbo, traction control, electronic stability, tiptronic six speed gearbox, cruise control and the works. One key difference between a European car and a US car is that Europeans like to go round corners.. that the Smart Roadster is easily one of the best handling cards of it's type. A small roadster isn't for everybody, but if you're looking for a Mazda MX-5/Miata size car then it's pretty good. These little roadsters aren't designed for drag racing.. they're designed to be fun!
Actually gas is about $7/US Gal here. Top speed isn't the point. Heck a lot of cars can go faster in a straight line, which is fine if you live in Arizona or something, but for the rest of the world we have these things called bends.
And although the Honda Civic EX/Type R/whatever is a decent car from a mechanical point of view, it's basically just a bland Japanese thing with zero character. If I wanted a dull car, I'd buy one perhaps. It might be fun to drive, but no-one would care.
What? If you want the car, buy some shares of ZAP! ?
What kind of nonsense is that? You must work for ZAP! So just how MANY shares of ZAP! stock should I buy to get to the top of the waiting list to get a SMART ForTwo?
ZAP! exists not to sell cars, but to pump up their stock price. These cars are imported by a Registered Importer [gnkauto.com] and converted to US Standards for resale to US Citizens.
Overseeing the import and conversion is a company named "Smart-Automobiles LLC" which has NO CONNECTION to Mercedes Benz / DaimlerChrysler. They have to buy these things RETAIL in Europe, bring them over to the US, convert them, then ZAP! sells "dealerships" and "franchises" across the country and then the "dealer" takes his cut. No wonder the price is so high.
ZAP! exists merely to sell franchises and dealerships [zapworld.com] for a brand they do not own the rights to.
You cannot buy a Smart ForTwo from ZAP!, you can only buy a dealership.
Despite their advertising claims, ZAP! does NO CONVERSIONS, they are nothing but a bunch of marketing droids in an office trying to get people to think they are a "real" company that actually produces some sort of product.
Here is a conversation [fark.com] on FARK where a few people (including a former employee apparently) pull back the curtain on ZAP!
Here is one quote from the conversation:
The SMART car may be a good idea, but don't buy it from ZAP. They exist for the sole purpose of pumping up their stock price so a few big investors can dump them before any serious shareholders know what happened.
MB / DaimlerChrysler plans to introduce the SMART BRAND to the US with a 2006 model that is a small SUV,built in Brazil called the ForMore, from that point they may introduce a re-designed version of the ForTwo for the US / World market.
It will be interesting to see what happens when the "real" [smart.com] SMART Brand comes to the US and whether all these ZAP! dealers get hit with a restraining order to cease advertising or dealing a Brand they do not have the rights to.
occasionally, they sent me snail mail spam that included shareholder only discounts on their products.
it was a 'green' smidge in my IRA that cost me about 150$ total.. I don't however work for them- or have any connections with them whatsoever... nor do I know that such is still a practice with them.
Perhaps in Europe, but not in the US. Where I live, speed limits under 35mph are confined to residential areas. Most in-city streets are 40 or 45, and the highways' traffic flows somewhere between 60 and 70, depending on the time of day. One of these roller skates wouldn't be able to keep up.
Ahem.. you do realize Europe contains, for example, Germany? Where the Autobahn has no speed limits whatsoever, and the traffic flows accordingly? And the most common maximum highway speed limit in other European countries is, in my experience, 120 km/h, which is 75 mph.
the highways' traffic flows somewhere between 60 and 70, depending on the time of day
I've driven across many of the states in the US, and I've yet to find any place where there aren't Semi trucks on the road, going slower than the rest of the traffic.
In CA it's de jury, but most everywhere else, they just can't get up to 75 with all the weight, up a slope, into the wind, etc. It's a miserable experience to be behind a couple trucks as one decides to go into the open lane an gradually pass the other truck
Sure, but it looks like ZAP are distributing them in the U.S. Or maybe they just need a funkier name - what we Brits call Vauxhall cars the rest of the world call 'Opal'.
But I don't get it: Smart are DaimlerChrysler, and Chrysler's a big US name - ?
Smart is manufactured and marketed in Europe by an unaffiliated party and made US/CA compliant by DMC.
That "unaffiliated party" is Mercedes Benz (and
hence ultimately, Daimler Chrysler). I wonder why
they don't seem to want to market it themselves,
and are relying on Zap instead. Worried about it
being a flop in the US and not wanting to damage
their reputation, perhaps?
Yes, it is Smart. It is a truly cool little car but sadly not very good in our (Norway) winter conditions. A coworker had the terrifying experience of sliding down a loooong hill sideways on snow with this baby. And winter tyres.
We've had these, or things that look just like these in the UK for quite some time. Looking cool in, IMHO, would not really be possible.... and of course there is the question that people ponder over about whether if one was stopped suddenly it would start rolling end of end....:)
I have already seen some posts about how "dangerous" these cars will be in the states when sharing the road with the "killer" SUVs and such-- but let me dispell some prejudices:
1. SMART cars are essentially big roll cages with coverings for the hood, door, and roof. They are quite safe for the riders should there be an accident. Moreover, they are engineered to "bounce" away from an oncoming impact.
2. With the engines placed as they are, a front-end collision does not put the block in the drivers lap (and crush his legs).
3. I would much much much rather be in one of these than some crumplicious dwarf from Ford
It's usually not the external impact that kills you. It's your organs getting bashed around inside your body. Remember, your organs are moving at 40 MPH along with your body. If your body suddenly starts "bouncing" around that's the worse possible action. A hard roll cage design just is not a good idea in low speed (60 MPH) accidents.
In a collision the vehicle with more mass wins. Even a little Ford Escort has a 2 to 1 weight advantage against this Zapper thing.
They may very well remain fully in tact - but just as cruical in a crash is the deceleration rate of the occupants. The "bounce" would only serve to make this worse.
What it lacks are crumple zones which reduce the deceleration rate.
The ideal design for a safe car is a large crumple zone (=length) with a ridged cage to protect the occupants.
It's always hilarious to me how people never can seem to take the time to RTFA (or other links in the submission), but they take something a poster said (that this car 'bounces' in collisions) as not only proven but gospel truth. In fact, the manufacturer's site disagrees with you. It calls the entire body a 'crumple zone'; the front wheels are also crumple zones. This thing won't be bouncing more than any other car would, especially in front collisions, as the wheels are designed to crumple and absorb impact. Why is it that 40 people commented about how bouncing around in a roll cage is a bad thing, but not one of them could be troubled to find out if the car actually behaved that way? Shame on you lazy assholes. Also, the site specifically talks about how the wheelbase is too short for this car to fold in on itself in t-bone collisions. I wouldn't drive one of these because I'm not a techno-listening super dweeb. However, it does appear that they've gone far out of their way to ensure that these dorky little things are safe. hopefully they really *are* that safe, because I have a feeling I might have to bang my '83 Ford Crown Vic off one or two of 'em in the wild... you know, just to see if they bounce.
I'm not entirely sure how a post insulting other posters and making gross assumptions gets moderated "Informative", but FYI, I did read the article. I've also seen crash studies of the Smart cars (the European version, not these "federalized" ones that are sold by a 3rd party, not the original manaufacturer).
They are not designed for high speed highway use, they are urban cars where a 75mph crash isn't likely to happen. The vehicle may survive them, but its a fallacy to think that a driver may be safer in
It doesn't "bounce around", but i think it's fair to say that it does "bounce off" the larger vehicle.
I'm sure it's survivable, but i suspect i'd be more comfortable in the larger Merc (that said, i'm a fan of the smart car concept, my main problem with it is that i think it's overpriced for what it is).
These cars are designed for city driving. You may not understand if you have never lived in a huge city. I saw these cars all over London. If I still lived in London I would want one too. They are great for the small roads of Europe. If I had to take a long trip I would probably take a train. However, in Atlanta I drive every where. I can not take a train for long trips. So a bigger car is needed to feel safe on I-75 while going down to Florida. However, this car could find a market as a commute car
If I was in the market for a 2-seat super-efficient car, why would I buy one from a manufacturer that has limited support/service options?
Compare the Zap to Honda's Insight http://automobiles.honda.com/models/model _overview.asp?ModelName=Insight 60/66 mpg city/highway (I can't view the Toyota Prius because of evil plugin-requirements.)
Honda, has a proven track record of quality automobiles. Zap, in Europe? I don't know. Colour me ignorant.
For a holiday with my missus driving around Southern Germany looking at stuff. It could cruise at 80mph, there was plenty of headroom (I'm 6'4", but had several inches spare over my head), enough room for luggage, it all felt slick and solid. I did have to ensure some scoffing about my lack of manliness from German friends though:-( I calculated fuel efficiency at the end of the week and it was ~67 mpg.
On the downside because the car is rather high and narrow (think two mopeds bolted together side by side), I'm told they can be scarey in side-winds.
I can see a lot of negative comments at the moment, so I thought I'd add my own (UK-based) opinion.
I've always been an in-principle fan of these SMARTs. I haven't driven one, but I've been inside one at various motor shows and there's plenty of space for two plus shopping or weekend luggage. You're not going to go trans-America with it, but to think about in that way is missing the point.
It makes an excellent city car. There are a decent number kicking around in London, and I seem to remember seeing even more when I was Hamburg a few years ago. In the city, you don't care about 90mph, you care that you can pull out nippily, find a parking space and turn round. This is the best answer I've seen since the original Mini (or maybe the Renault Twingo - never did understand why that didn't make it to the UK).
I'm actively considering swapping a Jaguar X-Type for one. Reason? My car mainly drives me to the train station in the morning and back, and a Jag is total overkill for that. We have an S-Type also for weekend trips or serious travel...why have two cars that do the same job? Only thing holding me back at the moment is a concern about its ability to cope with bad weather.
I recommended a couple I know to try these out a few years ago, on the same 'in principle' bit as you. They tried it (Frank was very sceptical), loved it (the bit where he changed his mind was doing a U turn in a normal road instead of a 3-point), bought one. Then his bro and bro-in-law got one. Then some friends... you see where I'm going.
They are every bit as good as you think. They are totally stable, comfortable and customiseable, safer than many other 'normal' cars both for those inside and any peds you might hit, and you get big smiles from people - tops!
There's at least one of these cars being used by the New South Wales police here in Sydney and it's painted just like a regular cop car.
It drove past me once as I was walking to lunch in the city, the sight of two cops in this thing made me and a lot of other people piss ourselves laughing:-)
You could tell the cops felt like dicks in it, they just had these sheepish grins on their faces...
This car is designed purely for city driving. It's a 2 seater car, and when you actually see them up close, they are really dinky.
Personally, I think they are great. I probably wouldn't have one as an only car, but have it as a second car for city driving only.
Seemingly the majority of cars caught speeding in London are Smart cars. Only in the UK and here they are Mercedes Smart cars (designed by the Swatch people, no less).
(UK) I took delivery of a Smart ForTwo two weeks ago, and the grin still hasn't left my face.
They're superbly well made, very very quick off the mark. I grew up driving Minis (proper minis, not those funny BMW things) and this Smart is the logical progression.
On the bad side, they're noisy when you stick your foot down hard, the traction control is a bit keen in places, and the standard stereo system blows.
Other than that, I could not be happier. Please take one for a test drive before you judge!
Here in Europe it has been possible to buy 60mpg cars that will do 90mph+ for years...I really don't see how this is a revelation. Most new hatchbacks (especially the turbodiesels) can do this. Hell my 15 year old Peugeot 205 can do 55mpg.
This is not a troll but it would be really nice when certain parts of the world realise that having a 2.5 tonne behemoth that barely can get 5mpg is just not a smart idea.
However, until the USA switches to low-sulfur diesel fuel completely in September 2006, you can forget about buy turbodiesel-powered small cars here in the USA.
But I do think that Honda will sell turbodiesel-powered small cars here in the USA by 2007. Imagine a second-generation Honda Fit powered by a 1.4-liter I-4 i-CTDi turbodiesel engine getting 60+ miles per US gallon fuel efficiency! =)
Audi's A2 has a 3L model which is so named as it can do 100km on 3 litres of fuel - it's a 1.2 litre turbocharged 3-cylinder diesel. The Volkswagen Lupo is available with the same engine. [volkswagen...ronment.de] Both are more substantially-built cars which feel safer than a Smart - although Mercedes-Daimler-Chrysler's marketing shows that the Smart may easily be as safe in an accident - refer to earlier posts with more detail.
The only real innovation of the 2-door Smart is that its an efficient Petrol car (overcoming a seeming aversion to Diesel in the US market) and is much easier to drive in tight spaces.
ultra low sulpher diesel is already available at many gas stations (most arco stations) in california.
maybe i'm a rouge environmentalist (or maybe i don't fit a box) -- i think diesel technology is great. the problem is the fuel. removing sulpher from petro diesel allows catalitic converters to be used while biodiesel closes the carbon cycle -- it doesn't put any more carbon into the air than was removed from the air by the organisims that created the fuel.
i'm really interested in (commercially non-existant) diesel hybrids whose engines run at a constant speed, producing electricity which powers an all electric drivetrain (this is how locomotives have been built for years). by running the engine at a constant speed, the engine can be tuned for maximum efficiency without need for fancy add-ons like turbo chargers which are needed to improve diesel's otherwise sluggish acceleration. give me an efficient diesel power generator, fewer batteries, and high output
Americans are adverse to diesel, even TDI, for historical reasons. There's been some talk that they're going to try to reintroduce "next-gen" TDI cars in the next few years; how they do in the US market will determine how many more diesels are marketed here in subsequent years.
So the closest we can get to 60mpg is the Prius, which is selling like hotcakes. I think the Smart Car will have a specific demographic, but will do well in those markets: I forsee a lot of them going to big metro areas. But they probably won't do so well in Texas.
I work in a MINI Cooper dealership in Texas and I can definitely say that the Smart Cars will do quite well here.
There is a huge backlash against SUVs in Texas, and not by those granola munching tree huggers that everyone hates to stand next to on the bus, but by the much maligned Soccer Moms and Neo-yuppies that have kept the SUV business growing over the last few years. It seems that people that live in urban areas and that have owned a SUV would rather not have one again. I can't tell you how many people trade in F250 crew cab trucks, Suburbans, etc. here for MINIs.
Personally, I think that the fact that everything in Texas is so spread out and requires so much driving to get to will accelerate the demand for smaller more fuel efficient cars here, especailly when coupled with the rising cost of fuel.
I can cite a couple of things to back this up: A two to three month wait for a new MINI in Texas, a 8-10 month (maybe!) wait for a new Prius in Texas. In addition, I talk to quite a few people each week that not only know about the Smart cars but who also want to own one.
I will concur that in the more rural areas you won't see many of these, but that will be common to all places, not just Texas.
Especially with Honda about to introduce the Honda Fit here in the USA within next 18 months.
For those who don't know, the Honda Fit (known as the Jazz in Europe) is an very small car that has just as much interior room as a Honda Civic sedan and is quite a bit more fuel efficient than the Civic, especially when powered by the 1.3-liter I-4 i-DSI engine. Honda has publicly said that they will sell a car smaller than the Civic in the USA market soon, especially since Honda will design the next-generation Honda Civic due in September 2005 for a more upmarket type of buyer; the Honda Fit will fill the gap for first-time Honda car buyers here in the USA. However, note that the Honda Fit Americans will get will NOT be the current model sold in Japan and Europe, but a slightly-larger second-generation model designed with larger-sized American passengers and side-curtain air bags in mind; that new model is supposed to be unveiled in Japan this coming summer.
While you'd be more protected in a crash in an SUV than in a compact, SUVs are far more likely to get into an accident in the first place due to reduced maneuverability and larger size. Also, some SUVs are classified as trucks, which means they don't have to meet the auto body safety standards of passenger vehicles.
"Drivers of the tiny Jetta die at a rate of just forty-seven per million, which is in the same range as drivers of the five-thousand-pound Chevrolet Suburban and almost half that of popular S.U.V. models like the Ford Explorer or the GMC Jimmy." --Malcolm Gladwell, http://gladwell.com/2004/2004_01_12_a_suv.html [gladwell.com], which also includes a full chart of fatalities-per-million drivers of the most popular cars in the US.
Not so SMART... . . . when it meets the business end of an SUV or Hummer in an accident
Then the only "smart" thing to drive (extrapolating from your statement) would then be another Hummer or behemoth SUV, which i sure as fuck would not be driving.
No, that's even worse. A SMART will ricochet off most little trucks (unless it's stuck under a bullbar?) but an SUV to SUV collision is usually terminal for both drivers. Most SUVs don't crush too well so the impact passes to their occupants... If you want to crash into a Hummer, either drive a Semi or a safe but big sedan like an S-Class (more to absorb the impact).
Actually, you'd come out of that kind of collission pretty well. The Smart's tridion safety cage is almost indestructable. I've seen this thing crash tested.. the outside of the car is the entire crumple zone, and the passengers are protected in the safety cell. No cabin instrusions, nothing. Up against a normal road car, the Smart usually comes off better.
On channel 5 in the UK recently they showed Smart cars being driven into various other large cars. It came off very well. To do a final test they drove a Smart into a concrete barrier at 70mph to see what would happen. The car come off fine. Both doors would open and one would even shut again.
Unfortunately, anybody in the car at the time would be dead due to internal injuries. No amount of safety cages, seat belts and air bags will stop your guts from going splat internally when decelerating from 70mph to 0 in about 1 meter.
> Unfortunately, anybody in the car at the time > would be dead due to internal injuries. No amount > of safety cages, seat belts and air bags will stop > your guts from going splat internally when > decelerating from 70mph to 0 in about 1 meter.
Are you sure about that?
say we start at 70mph, which is u=70*1800/(60*60)=35m/s.
Assume the deceleration is uniform, then we can say v^2=u^2+2as, now say that the final velocity, v, is zero, and the displacement s is 1.0m, the acceleration a works out as a=(35**2)/(2*1.0)=612m/s^2 or about 62g
The duration of the impact will be (70*1800/3600)/612=0.06s
Table 2.6 gives tolerable x direction accelerations of 45-85G depending on whether it is +x or -x direction with times between 0.04 and 0.1s. the earlier charts give similar information.
So even if we do come to a dead (hopefully not literally!) stop from 70mph in one metre, it is very severe, but it is in the range of accelerations that can be survived. The difference between survival and death is likely to be down to the quality of the restraint system "safety cages, seat belts and air bags".
you are absolutely right. I used to hear the same FDUd from people when I bought and drove my 88 Pontiac Fiero GT that could easily do 160mpg and after some very cheap mods still would kick the arse of any ricer on the road today.
People would call it a deathtrap, freaked out when I mentioned that their armrest was the gas tank, and ignored that it recieved one of the highest safety ratings of all the sports cars of it's size and was very high in safety rating for all cars of that time.
The Smart has actually been proven to come off very well in crashes.
There is no engine in the front of a Smart to be pushed into the passenger compartment (preventing leg injuries etc.)
A UK TV show demo'd the Smart being crashed into a solid concrete wall at 70mph. Amazingly, the tridion safety cell preserved the shape of the vehicle sufficiently that the doors would still open/close. Another bonus is the low mass and hence inertia of the Smart which means you can litterally 'bounce-off' solid objects while dissipating crash energy in a safe manner.
The Smart also features high-quality airbags to prevent neck/back injuries.
Furthermore, the Smart is pedestrian-friendly, once-again, the hapless would-be road-kill bounces off the plastic panels and there are no suspension turrets to impale them.
Citroen 2CVs (please,/. janitors, can we have accented characters?) are damn near impossible to roll. Even if you jack up one side, the other side will just dip lower and lower. You need to get one side around 3' off the deck before it will even start to roll.
Curiously enough, this is because they don't have anti-roll bars. If you throw one into a roundabout at 50mph, it will roll from side to side alarmingly but it will *never* *ever* lift a wheel off the road.
Hah! Imagine when your SUV is hit head on by an Abrahms tank! And they all suck if an asteroid hits you straight on! Well - it is a decent car with high sitting positions. I don't think its less safe than some Civic. (Yes, I've seen those on the streets. In Russia even).
It's called "Smart" for a reason. The whole thing is based around a nearly-indestructable safety cage like an F1 car. They are incredibly safe. Yeah, a bit strange to drive though.
Keep in mind that in the US market small cars generally don't sell well, so nobody have wanted to push them in the US to any extent before, whereas in the rest of the world people care more about fuel consumption and don't mind (and in urban areas often see it as an advantage) if the car is small.
The MSNBC article that is linked on the ZAP site [msn.com] say $12,000 for the basic model and up to $20,000 for the convertible with all the options.
There are a few posts here talking about support too, saying the Honda Insight is a better purchase because of proven track record. The Insight is battery electric that needs to be completely replaced after 6 years, it also is a VERY expensive car $36,000 for what you get.
This vehicle will most likely be serviced at Mercedes or Chrysler dealerships and runs on ordinar
Cost.. Cheap. Easy to look up on the net. Yes, I've driven one. One of my friends owns one, and I was sceptical about it when I first saw it.
After getting in, it feels very spacious, and comfortable. Quite zippy for the engine size. Everything is well laid out. Stable on corners, good acceleration, and good braking.
Superb city drive, although I prefer my Saab 9000 for motorways and long drives, but, when in the city looking for somewhere to park, or just counting petrol costs for start/stop driving, you can bet that I'm missing that smart car.:)
90 MPH???? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:2)
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:3, Informative)
That said, parking is not a problem in one of them.
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:3)
hehe.. out of curiosity - can you get them with white walled tyres? guess you could fit a good dozen of ppl in it and call it a taxi!
But I was under the impression that these things dont really happen that often in the US.. or..?
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:5, Interesting)
No kidding. One of the highlighs of this car is that it's as long as a normal car is wide.
Therefore, to park you can just pull straight in, putting the front end (or rear) of the car parallel to the street.
For urban parking woes, it doesn't get any better.
parking isn't a problem, tickets are (Score:3, Interesting)
Why you *HAVE* to parallel park. (Score:3, Insightful)
A friend with a BMW Isetta (the little one, not the bloated 600cc version) gets tickets in San Francisco for parking perpendicular to the curb, never mind the fact that the car is designed for it.
Isetta. Now that's a scary car. There's no crush space at all in those things, and the handling is horrible - especially the smaller 3-wheeled version. But they're a fun car - I'd love to have one because the BMW logo on it would piss off snobs.
Until the cops are clued, the law doesn't matter as long as paying
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:3, Informative)
Actually in the US it varies from state to state. The state's have different laws when it comes to driving/roads/etc. That's why the speed limit is different in different states. That's also why it is easy to get a driver's license in some states and harder in others.
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.smarttune.co.uk/tuning.htm [smarttune.co.uk]
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:4, Interesting)
They performed the same crash test with another normal family car (I think it was some vauxhaul) and it faired no better than the Smart.
Mass Always Wins, 6'4" Europeans (Score:3, Interesting)
That the collision would be between two very different cars is the important thing. It would be important in america, more and more people there are buying bigger and bigger cars. This is different from europe -- people there are more likely to own smaller cars.
We do have a lot more automotive diversity here (North America, not just the USA) than in Europe. In the US, there's more of a do-it-yourself spirit than I find in either Canada or Europe - Americans tend to enjoy working with their hands. This me
Re:Mass Always Wins, 6'4" Europeans (Score:3, Informative)
It depends on the type of collision.
I saw the result of a head-on between an SUV and a BMW Zx (1? 3? can't remember) about seven years ago. The BMW was so low to the ground that the SUV used it as a ramp, went airborne, flipped over, landed on its roof and killed the driver.
The driver of the BMW walked away.
Re:You don't understand how crumple zones work. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:4, Interesting)
People are buying SUVs to be a bit safer than the average car in a crash. So now everybody's gotta get one to stay safe.
Then some people start to drive small trucks to stay safer than the average SUV in a crash. So now everybody's gotta have one to be safe.
Where does it end? Everyone driving 18-wheelers?
Tax private use of larger vehicles. Either through petrol(gas) tax, road tax, purchase tax, take your pick!
In countries where it's more expensive to drive huge vehicles, people chosoe smaller ones. The average car is lighter, more efficient, and better for the environment. And people in smaller cars (or pedestrians) are in less danger in a crash. Just look at the cars in an average city in Europe!
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:3, Interesting)
One Brit TV program recently did a test where they recreated a fairly normal situation, trying to avoid a suddenly braking vehicle ahead of it.
The really interesting bit for the "ordinary car" (BMW!) the test was conducted by the TV presenter with no safty gear other than a seat belt.
The SUV test vehicle was driven by a professional stunt man with crash helmet and five point seat belt! They knew it was gonna role!
The SUV ro
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:4, Interesting)
hahahha, now that's funny!
What isn't funny, is that curves in the highway aren't necessary to require swerving, although I periodically hear about someone taking an exit ramp or turn too quickly.
IIRC, I've seen three SUVs roll...
Then, there was the Jeep Cherokee which exploded after a rear-end collision, immolating a family of 3, and the SUV of some type which tried to drive a 270 ramp at 50mph, and exploded in the trees. I didn't see those, but they do happen.
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:4, Insightful)
There is even a good chance of this happening with a Smart Car. As the bumper of the SUV compresses the front end, the front end and cage of the little car will become a ramp, the tires will blow or the axles collapse, and the car will be locked in place by the sheer friction of the weight of both vehicles plus the force of lifting the SUV. The Smart Car will stop abruptly, which is bad, but the SUV will become a tumbling death trap, with 2 to 4 tons of vehicle crushing the heads of its occupants like overripe grapes.
Trust me, stopping is better than tumbling. Accidents aren't about winning. It's about how you stop. SUV's don't, and that's the problem. Even the people that make them admit that SUV's are more dangerous than standard passenger cars.
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:5, Funny)
Just wait until that crappy SUV gets in a head on collision with a Freightliner. [freightlinertrucks.com] Only a moron would drive anything smaller than a Freightliner. Good thing the Liebherr [liebherr.com] isn't licensed for onroad use, or we'd all have to drive one of them.
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:5, Informative)
it has 4 seats which makes it actually useful and it was no problem at all to go over 190 km/h on the autobahn.
that should be fast enough for most US drivers
it looks weak but drives surprisingly well, it's full with electronics to keep it stable - and it really feels like it.
Re:90 MPH???? (Score:5, Funny)
I took it out on the motorway round Brussels and while it's a lot like driving a hair dryer it is suprisingly comfortable.
I wouldn't want to do any long motorway trips in one though, but then that really isn't what the designers intended either.
I'd have preferred a manual gearbox (smart forfour is the only smart with this as an option) but that won't be an issue in the US.
One thing I noticed is nobody, and I mean absolutely nobody, can stand being overtaken by one of these.
Re:90 MPH???? Not so bad (Score:5, Informative)
One of the tests shown was an offset head on impact with a Mercedes S-class. Can't recall the speeds, but the combined speed was high. The front of the s-class was seriously smashed in by the smart car. The front of the smart car too was a mess BUT crucially the passenger compartment of the smart was intact and the occupants would have escaped serious injury.
However, because the passenger shell of the SMART car is so strong and stiff, some tests have shown high passenger loads due to restraints. No doubt due to the small crumple zones on the vehicle.
So I guess if you hit something in a SMART, hit something with a crumple zone that you can share!
Old known in Europe (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Old known in Europe (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, they've been around in the UK for five years now and they're still not that common (and I get to see both the South East's countryside and London).
That's not to say they're bad cars - they're basically two-seat Mercedes A-classes, I think, and I was impressed with the A-class when work hired me one. But I'd want more room.
Re:Old known in Europe (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Old known in Europe (Score:2)
Oh, no, having checked the Smart site [thesmart.co.uk] it's actually part of Daimler/Chrysler.
Re:Old known in Europe (Score:3, Informative)
Mercedes is actually Mercedes-Benz, which was a part of Daimler-Benz, which merged with Chrysler corporation to make Daimler-Chrysler. So Maybach, Mercedes, Chrysler, and Dodge cars all come from the same parent corporation. (Don't ask about Ford, they're even worse.)
--Ender
Re:Old known in Europe (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Old known in Europe (Score:3, Informative)
for real ? (Score:2, Insightful)
it'll like 5 years old in europe, third gen model are shipping now
zap! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:zap! (Score:3, Funny)
sure, why not. [roadraceengineering.com]
Call that a Smart Car...? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Call that a Smart Car...? (Score:2)
Re:Call that a Smart Car...? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Call that a Smart Car...? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Call that a Smart Car...? (Score:3, Informative)
And although the Honda Civic EX/Type R/whatever is a decent car from a mechanical point of view, it's basically just a bland Japanese thing with zero character. If I wanted a dull car, I'd buy one perhaps. It might be fun to drive, but no-one would care.
Where the heck am I g
I've owned zap stock in my life, (Score:3, Informative)
ZAP! = Pump n Dump (Score:4, Informative)
What? If you want the car, buy some shares of ZAP! ?
What kind of nonsense is that? You must work for ZAP!
So just how MANY shares of ZAP! stock should I buy to get to the top of the waiting list to get a SMART ForTwo?
ZAP! exists not to sell cars, but to pump up their stock price.
These cars are imported by a Registered Importer [gnkauto.com] and converted to US Standards for resale to US Citizens. Overseeing the import and conversion is a company named "Smart-Automobiles LLC" which has NO CONNECTION to Mercedes Benz / DaimlerChrysler.
They have to buy these things RETAIL in Europe, bring them over to the US, convert them, then ZAP! sells "dealerships" and "franchises" across the country and then the "dealer" takes his cut. No wonder the price is so high.
ZAP! exists merely to sell franchises and dealerships [zapworld.com] for a brand they do not own the rights to.
You cannot buy a Smart ForTwo from ZAP!, you can only buy a dealership.
Despite their advertising claims, ZAP! does NO CONVERSIONS, they are nothing but a bunch of marketing droids in an office trying to get people to think they are a "real" company that actually produces some sort of product.
Here is a conversation [fark.com] on FARK where a few people (including a former employee apparently) pull back the curtain on ZAP!
Here is one quote from the conversation:
MB / DaimlerChrysler plans to introduce the SMART BRAND to the US with a 2006 model that is a small SUV,built in Brazil called the ForMore, from that point they may introduce a re-designed version of the ForTwo for the US / World market.
It will be interesting to see what happens when the "real" [smart.com] SMART Brand comes to the US and whether all these ZAP! dealers get hit with a restraining order to cease advertising or dealing a Brand they do not have the rights to.
Re:ZAP! = Pump n Dump (Score:3, Interesting)
occasionally, they sent me snail mail spam that included shareholder only discounts on their products.
it was a 'green' smidge in my IRA that cost me about 150$ total.. I don't however work for them- or have any connections with them whatsoever... nor do I know that such is still a practice with them.
Other considerations (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Other considerations (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Other considerations (Score:4, Informative)
Ahem.. you do realize Europe contains, for example, Germany? Where the Autobahn has no speed limits whatsoever, and the traffic flows accordingly? And the most common maximum highway speed limit in other European countries is, in my experience, 120 km/h, which is 75 mph.
Re:Other considerations (Score:3, Interesting)
I've driven across many of the states in the US, and I've yet to find any place where there aren't Semi trucks on the road, going slower than the rest of the traffic.
In CA it's de jury, but most everywhere else, they just can't get up to 75 with all the weight, up a slope, into the wind, etc. It's a miserable experience to be behind a couple trucks as one decides to go into the open lane an gradually pass the other truck
Real Website (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Real Website (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, but it looks like ZAP are distributing them in the U.S. Or maybe they just need a funkier name - what we Brits call Vauxhall cars the rest of the world call 'Opal'.
But I don't get it: Smart are DaimlerChrysler, and Chrysler's a big US name - ?
Re:Real Website (Score:4, Insightful)
"Zap"??? (Score:5, Informative)
That "unaffiliated party" is Mercedes Benz (and hence ultimately, Daimler Chrysler). I wonder why they don't seem to want to market it themselves, and are relying on Zap instead. Worried about it being a flop in the US and not wanting to damage their reputation, perhaps?
smae 'SMART' as the one sold by Mercedes (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:smae 'SMART' as the one sold by Mercedes (Score:4, Interesting)
erm ..... no (Score:3, Interesting)
t
Cool looking, huh? (Score:3, Funny)
In a Yugo.... (Score:2, Troll)
Can't Honda bring something like the CRX back? Didn't those get like 55mpg, while being a halfway substantial car (albeit for only two people)?
As for its appearance, "cool" is a very subjective term.
roll cages with covers (Score:3, Informative)
1. SMART cars are essentially big roll cages with coverings for the hood, door, and roof. They are quite safe for the riders should there be an accident. Moreover, they are engineered to "bounce" away from an oncoming impact.
2. With the engines placed as they are, a front-end collision does not put the block in the drivers lap (and crush his legs).
3. I would much much much rather be in one of these than some crumplicious dwarf from Ford
Re:roll cages with covers (Score:3, Interesting)
It's usually not the external impact that kills you. It's your organs getting bashed around inside your body. Remember, your organs are moving at 40 MPH along with your body. If your body suddenly starts "bouncing" around that's the worse possible action. A hard roll cage design just is not a good idea in low speed (60 MPH) accidents.
In a collision the vehicle with more mass wins. Even a little Ford Escort has a 2 to 1 weight advantage against this Zapper thing.
Trust me, you don
Re:roll cages with covers (Score:3, Insightful)
What it lacks are crumple zones which reduce the deceleration rate.
The ideal design for a safe car is a large crumple zone (=length) with a ridged cage to protect the occupants.
Re:roll cages with covers (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:roll cages with covers (Score:5, Informative)
Re:roll cages with covers (Score:3, Interesting)
They are not designed for high speed highway use, they are urban cars where a 75mph crash isn't likely to happen. The vehicle may survive them, but its a fallacy to think that a driver may be safer in
Re:roll cages with covers (Score:3, Interesting)
It doesn't "bounce around", but i think it's fair to say that it does "bounce off" the larger vehicle.
I'm sure it's survivable, but i suspect i'd be more comfortable in the larger Merc (that said, i'm a fan of the smart car concept, my main problem with it is that i think it's overpriced for what it is).
Re:roll cages with covers (Score:3, Interesting)
Comparison... (Score:3, Interesting)
Compare the Zap to Honda's Insight
http://automobiles.honda.com/models/mode
60/66 mpg city/highway
(I can't view the Toyota Prius because of evil plugin-requirements.)
Honda, has a proven track record of quality automobiles.
Zap, in Europe? I don't know. Colour me ignorant.
Re:Comparison... (Score:5, Insightful)
Otherwise known as Daimler Benz [thesmart.co.uk]; been making quality automobiles [mercedes-benz.com] since 1886. So, not much track record there.
I hired one for a week (Score:5, Interesting)
On the downside because the car is rather high and narrow (think two mopeds bolted together side by side), I'm told they can be scarey in side-winds.
Very Popular (Score:5, Interesting)
To counter the negativty... (Score:5, Interesting)
I've always been an in-principle fan of these SMARTs. I haven't driven one, but I've been inside one at various motor shows and there's plenty of space for two plus shopping or weekend luggage. You're not going to go trans-America with it, but to think about in that way is missing the point.
It makes an excellent city car. There are a decent number kicking around in London, and I seem to remember seeing even more when I was Hamburg a few years ago. In the city, you don't care about 90mph, you care that you can pull out nippily, find a parking space and turn round. This is the best answer I've seen since the original Mini (or maybe the Renault Twingo - never did understand why that didn't make it to the UK).
I'm actively considering swapping a Jaguar X-Type for one. Reason? My car mainly drives me to the train station in the morning and back, and a Jag is total overkill for that. We have an S-Type also for weekend trips or serious travel...why have two cars that do the same job? Only thing holding me back at the moment is a concern about its ability to cope with bad weather.
No, I'm seriously interested in these.
Cheers,
Ian
Re:To counter the negativty... (Score:4, Interesting)
They are every bit as good as you think. They are totally stable, comfortable and customiseable, safer than many other 'normal' cars both for those inside and any peds you might hit, and you get big smiles from people - tops!
Justin.
Lanky geek fits, with space for warm beverage. (Score:5, Informative)
0. the cup holder is large enough for a thermally efficient coffee mug.
1. the boot area is large enough for two laptop rucksacks and an overnight bag, perfect for commuting.
2. the passenger seat can be folded flat, providing enough space to easily transport both a 22" monitor and an Extended ATX case.
3. with the iMove centrepiece, you can plug your iPod into it.
4. the soft top has a remote control.
6. this lanky geek (196cm 98k) finds it spacious - more roomy than say a Ford Mondeo (IIRC called a Galaxy over the pond).
7. it can be powered down in the tiniest of spaces
Used as a Police car (Score:3, Funny)
It drove past me once as I was walking to lunch in the city, the sight of two cops in this thing made me and a lot of other people piss ourselves laughing :-)
You could tell the cops felt like dicks in it, they just had these sheepish grins on their faces...
City Driving (Score:3, Interesting)
Personally, I think they are great. I probably wouldn't have one as an only car, but have it as a second car for city driving only.
Seemingly the majority of cars caught speeding in London are Smart cars. Only in the UK and here they are Mercedes Smart cars (designed by the Swatch people, no less).
T.
Gotta chime in (Score:3, Informative)
They're superbly well made, very very quick off the mark. I grew up driving Minis (proper minis, not those funny BMW things) and this Smart is the logical progression.
On the bad side, they're noisy when you stick your foot down hard, the traction control is a bit keen in places, and the standard stereo system blows.
Other than that, I could not be happier. Please take one for a test drive before you judge!
60mpg? 90mph? Old news I'm afraid (Score:5, Informative)
This is not a troll but it would be really nice when certain parts of the world realise that having a 2.5 tonne behemoth that barely can get 5mpg is just not a smart idea.
Re:60mpg? 90mph? Old news I'm afraid (Score:3, Informative)
But I do think that Honda will sell turbodiesel-powered small cars here in the USA by 2007. Imagine a second-generation Honda Fit powered by a 1.4-liter I-4 i-CTDi turbodiesel engine getting 60+ miles per US gallon fuel efficiency! =)
Re:60mpg? 90mph? Old news I'm afraid (Score:4, Informative)
The only real innovation of the 2-door Smart is that its an efficient Petrol car (overcoming a seeming aversion to Diesel in the US market) and is much easier to drive in tight spaces.
Re:60mpg? 90mph? Old news I'm afraid (Score:3, Informative)
maybe i'm a rouge environmentalist (or maybe i don't fit a box) -- i think diesel technology is great. the problem is the fuel. removing sulpher from petro diesel allows catalitic converters to be used while biodiesel closes the carbon cycle -- it doesn't put any more carbon into the air than was removed from the air by the organisims that created the fuel.
traditionally, biodiesel has focused on was
Re:Diesel is the way of the future (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:60mpg? 90mph? Old news I'm afraid (Score:4, Interesting)
Americans are adverse to diesel, even TDI, for historical reasons. There's been some talk that they're going to try to reintroduce "next-gen" TDI cars in the next few years; how they do in the US market will determine how many more diesels are marketed here in subsequent years.
So the closest we can get to 60mpg is the Prius, which is selling like hotcakes. I think the Smart Car will have a specific demographic, but will do well in those markets: I forsee a lot of them going to big metro areas. But they probably won't do so well in Texas.
Re:60mpg? 90mph? Old news I'm afraid (Score:4, Interesting)
There is a huge backlash against SUVs in Texas, and not by those granola munching tree huggers that everyone hates to stand next to on the bus, but by the much maligned Soccer Moms and Neo-yuppies that have kept the SUV business growing over the last few years. It seems that people that live in urban areas and that have owned a SUV would rather not have one again. I can't tell you how many people trade in F250 crew cab trucks, Suburbans, etc. here for MINIs.
Personally, I think that the fact that everything in Texas is so spread out and requires so much driving to get to will accelerate the demand for smaller more fuel efficient cars here, especailly when coupled with the rising cost of fuel.
I can cite a couple of things to back this up: A two to three month wait for a new MINI in Texas, a 8-10 month (maybe!) wait for a new Prius in Texas. In addition, I talk to quite a few people each week that not only know about the Smart cars but who also want to own one.
I will concur that in the more rural areas you won't see many of these, but that will be common to all places, not just Texas.
Cute yes, but... (Score:3, Interesting)
Especially with Honda about to introduce the Honda Fit here in the USA within next 18 months.
For those who don't know, the Honda Fit (known as the Jazz in Europe) is an very small car that has just as much interior room as a Honda Civic sedan and is quite a bit more fuel efficient than the Civic, especially when powered by the 1.3-liter I-4 i-DSI engine. Honda has publicly said that they will sell a car smaller than the Civic in the USA market soon, especially since Honda will design the next-generation Honda Civic due in September 2005 for a more upmarket type of buyer; the Honda Fit will fill the gap for first-time Honda car buyers here in the USA. However, note that the Honda Fit Americans will get will NOT be the current model sold in Japan and Europe, but a slightly-larger second-generation model designed with larger-sized American passengers and side-curtain air bags in mind; that new model is supposed to be unveiled in Japan this coming summer.
how long until.... (Score:3, Funny)
Alternatives? (Score:3, Interesting)
Neither look as lame as the smart car IM.
you're safer in a compact car than in an SUV (Score:3, Informative)
Nothing is then SMART (Score:4, Insightful)
Then the only "smart" thing to drive (extrapolating from your statement) would then be another Hummer or behemoth SUV, which i sure as fuck would not be driving.
Let's not be a part of the problem.
-tid242
Re:Nothing is then SMART (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not so SMART . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not so SMART . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, anybody in the car at the time would be dead due to internal injuries. No amount of safety cages, seat belts and air bags will stop your guts from going splat internally when decelerating from 70mph to 0 in about 1 meter.
Re:Not so SMART . . . (Score:5, Informative)
> would be dead due to internal injuries. No amount
> of safety cages, seat belts and air bags will stop
> your guts from going splat internally when
> decelerating from 70mph to 0 in about 1 meter.
Are you sure about that?
say we start at 70mph, which is u=70*1800/(60*60)=35m/s.
Assume the deceleration is uniform, then we can say
v^2=u^2+2as,
now say that the final velocity, v, is zero, and the displacement s is 1.0m, the acceleration a works out as
a=(35**2)/(2*1.0)=612m/s^2
or about 62g
The duration of the impact will be
(70*1800/3600)/612=0.06s
Now, to judge how deadly this is, we look at some data:
http://www.vnh.org/FSManual/02/03ImpactAccelerati
Table 2.6 gives tolerable x direction accelerations of 45-85G depending on whether it is +x or -x direction with times between 0.04 and 0.1s. the earlier charts give similar information.
So even if we do come to a dead (hopefully not literally!) stop from 70mph in one metre, it is very severe, but it is in the range of accelerations that can be survived. The difference between survival and death is likely to be down to the quality of the restraint system "safety cages, seat belts and air bags".
Re:Not so SMART . . . (Score:3, Interesting)
People would call it a deathtrap, freaked out when I mentioned that their armrest was the gas tank, and ignored that it recieved one of the highest safety ratings of all the sports cars of it's size and was very high in safety rating for all cars of that time.
These are also the
Survivability (Score:5, Interesting)
The Smart has actually been proven to come off very well in crashes.
There is no engine in the front of a Smart to be pushed into the passenger compartment (preventing leg injuries etc.)
A UK TV show demo'd the Smart being crashed into a solid concrete wall at 70mph. Amazingly, the tridion safety cell preserved the shape of the vehicle sufficiently that the doors would still open/close. Another bonus is the low mass and hence inertia of the Smart which means you can litterally 'bounce-off' solid objects while dissipating crash energy in a safe manner.
The Smart also features high-quality airbags to prevent neck/back injuries.
Furthermore, the Smart is pedestrian-friendly, once-again, the hapless would-be road-kill bounces off the plastic panels and there are no suspension turrets to impale them.
Re:Survivability (Score:3, Insightful)
70-0 mph in less than 0.2 of a second is not easy to support by the human body...
Re:Survivability (Score:3, Interesting)
Curiously enough, this is because they don't have anti-roll bars. If you throw one into a roundabout at 50mph, it will roll from side to side alarmingly but it will *never* *ever* lift a wheel off the road.
Re:Not so SMART . . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Who needs this shit?? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Who needs this shit?? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:ZAP? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:MSRP? Better than an Insight? (Score:3, Informative)
There are a few posts here talking about support too, saying the Honda Insight is a better purchase because of proven track record. The Insight is battery electric that needs to be completely replaced after 6 years, it also is a VERY expensive car $36,000 for what you get.
This vehicle will most likely be serviced at Mercedes or Chrysler dealerships and runs on ordinar
Re:Cost? (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, I've driven one. One of my friends owns one, and I was sceptical about it when I first saw it.
After getting in, it feels very spacious, and comfortable. Quite zippy for the engine size. Everything is well laid out.
Stable on corners, good acceleration, and good braking.
Superb city drive, although I prefer my Saab 9000 for motorways and long drives, but, when in the city looking for somewhere to park, or just counting petrol costs for start/stop driving, you can bet that I'm missing that smart car.
Re:A single collision with a Chevrolet Suburban... (Score:3, Insightful)