Slashdot Mirror
Smart Cars Coming to Canada and U.S.
AgniTheSane writes "Most importantly the Smart Car looks cool. It also gets 60 mpg, is four feet
smaller than a Mini Cooper (you can park two in a standard parking spot), the
plastic panels are easily swappable and one color all the way through (so you
can't scratch the paint), the steel frame makes it safe in an accident, and you
can get it with in-dash Bluetooth (and in Europe can read and write email via
the car speakers and a microphone). The Smart car is coming to the US soon, and will cost as little as $12,000. You can read about it in
Wired or on
MSNBC, or you can go straight
to ZAP who will be
selling them in the US soon, or the smart car
website in the UK. "
Provided the accident is a frontal collision with a Mercedes Benz sedan, like in the publicity video, with the Mercedes' crumple zone absorbing all the impact.
Most importantly the Smart Car looks cool
It does not. What kind of funky aesthetic sense does a person have to have, to make that look cool?
If Mr. Edison had thought smarter he wouldn't sweat as much. --Nikola Tesla
While meant as a joke, there is too much truth to this statement (the giving up SUVs part, that is). Especially in larger cities that have a widespread suburban sprawl (like Dallas, Houston, LA, Seattle, Atlanta) that makes owning a bigger car easier, if not something of a status symbol. In cities where parking space is a premium or driving to work doesn't regularly involve an hour+ commute, people may jump on these cars, but we Yanks like big cars to cart our big families around in.
Then again, I figured that only teenage girls would buy the MINI, and I see those things all over the place.
Don't dismiss the MINI so quickly. Have you driven one? The thing handles like a go-kart. The supercharged Cooper S is an absolute joy to drive. Like BMW's, the MINI tends to attract the trendy crowd, but the hardware is definitely up to snuff.
There's a useful term when you need to refer to Canada and the USA together: "North America".
Canadians use this more than Americans do, and there can be confusion about whether you intend to include Mexico and the Caribbean Basin, but all in all Americans underuse the term.
org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
Zero to sixty in twenty seconds?
These things are going to need all the crash protection they can get. They're going to get flattened on any highway on-ramp.
...It is not user-serviceable without a proprietary toolset.
Jokes about comparing proprietary software to a car with the hood welded shut are very chilling if this car is the beginning of a trend.
Mart"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
Still safer than a motorcycle (yes, I ride one) and better weather protection, too. Listen: no one is putting a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to buy a Smart car. I'd like to think that people are smart enough to choose the balance of safety and utility that's right for them.
That being said, I wouldn't buy a Smart. Why? Because it's too wide, and can't be used to "split" between lanes of traffic. In NYC, 9 or 10 months out of the year, a motor cycle or bicycle makes a much better "city car."
-b.
A few years later I heard things like great mileage, funky distinct design, low price, reliable, and most importantly able to park it in the tiniest of spaces.
I don't think that the SMART will ever be the cross country driving car of choice, but as a second car in the city for the 2 parent working family I think its a brilliant idea . . . Why drive a 4000 pound SUV to pick up a gallon of milk at the supermarket if you don't have to?
Yes, the average American family is that large (read obscenely FAT).
I would expect that the majority of the US and Canada will continue to buy more 'full on gas guzzzlers' as opposed to these not so smart cars. We've had them in Europe for a while and they really haven't made a big impact here, even with the more green and liberal thinking that we have.
Why? welll like i say, they really arent that smart. Selling cars that reduce the amount of co2 is always a worthwhile thing however you cannot substitute sensible, flexible and economically sound public transport policy for the automotive industry's equivalent of the 'light/lite' cigarette. Not that most of the tax payers in the western hemisphere care anyway, that's why we still buy and love the freedom of our cars.
Make no mistake, car sharing and long distance travel is pretty much unviable in these things so understandably they only really get bought in urban areas. Mostly smart cars are seen and viewed as a posher and wankier version of the scooter. Mercedes would be thrilled if everyone in the city bought one; I'm not so sure our planet would be
Cool? not...
Disclaimer: I'm not a 'manc', I'm Scottish
my other sig is written in brainfuck
The moms love the SUVs coz they feel safe - problem is, when they hit a Smart even slighly, they kill the occupant. Then they get a fine :)
This is not a signature.
To complain about people not understanding Linux or open source would be entirely hypocritical of this community, with all the posts about the lack of safety of Smart Cars posted here! This is one of the safest vehicles in the world.
Lighter = safer
Everything else aside, this vehicle is safer because it's lighter. There is no substitute for a lack of mass when your vehicle becomes a ball of plastic and metal momentum; the more weight, the more force is required to curb that momentum, so to speak. Force, in this case, typically translates into rolling, or crumpling. Modern vehicles do lots of both, particuarly SUV's. So bear in mind, mass is an inherent evil in vehicle safety.
Solid cage = safer
Second, this little critter has a solid cage that can withstand the problem I just mentioned - its own mass. Most vehicles will crumple under their own mass at moderate speeds. At 65 km/h, head-on this car will walk away mostly unscathed, and the passenger will only have minor injuries.
Lateral weakness = myth
From the side, the risk of being "T-boned", or laterally impaled, is highly overrated. The solid beam connecting the rear wheels, the axle, and the similarly reinforced front wheels, in such close proximity pretty much insure that if you are hit, unless it's a motorcycle, two of your strongest and most reinforced points of impact (the tires) are involved in the crash. Furthermore, there is a metal cage surrounding you that can easily withstand substantial impact.
Run-over = myth
The risk that it will be "run over" are also highly overrated. If a big vehicle hits a smart car, it becomes a wedge, pushing the larger vehicle into the air so that the larger vehicle can dissipate its energy on other things, like concrete, pavement and telephone poles.
See, eg. Smart and Tough, The National Post, 6/11/04
Arguing that this car isn't safe is being on the wrong side of competence, akin to arguing the superiority of Microsoft Windows' security. There may be valid points, but for the most part, you're just wrong.
(Not to sound too cynicial, but I think it's a valid point, and hypocricy is a peeve)
Motorcycle versus "Smart Car" -> Smart Car wins
Bicycle versus "Smart Car" -> Smart Car wins
Human versus "Smart Car" -> Smart Car wins.
Just because the Smart Car may be lower on the survivability totem pole doesn't intrinsically make them "unsafe". I rode my bicycle in rush hour traffic in Washington, D.C. and nearby suburbs for over 20 years without a single accident with another vehicle (I did hit a few potholes that dismounted me abruptly).
Since I knew I was more at risk I didn't fall into a false sense of security. I religiously indicated my intentions to other traffic, made eye contact with other drivers, didn't brazenly run red lights/stop signs, weave in and out of stopped traffic, or any of the multitude of wantonly perilous activities other cyclists seemed bent on practicing.
Same in many respects with SUVs. People get this totally false idea that they are "safe" and thus drive like morons and end up killing themselves and others.
Here's the trends from the Centers for Disease Control http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/prev _char.htm
This is over and above those who are just considered overweight.Back on-topic, the car weights 1500 pounds. You won't see it hauling 2 300-pounders with a sub-700cc motor. Then again, as gas prices keep doubling, Mr. and Mrs. Lard-belly won't have the $$$ to both stuff their faces AND run their 8mpg SUVs/cattle haulers, so either they or their vehicles are going on a diet, one way or another.
I have a feeling that the manufacturer hasn't seen the state of the roads in Detroit. One of these could seriously fall into a pot hole and be gone forever. I have a Nissan Sentra and a Sierra, and driving the car around Detroit is like commuting through an obstacle course every day. The SMART car is half the size of that. I don't care how well it performs in an accident, I'd rather not BE in an accident.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
It requires no parking (space, effort or cost), zero maintenance, it's extremely environment-friendly and it's very silent.
Other advantages: no need for a garage, no problem starting it up in winter and, best of all, it steers itself to destination.
It's only used in urban areas, but so are the SMARTs.
This wonder of modern technology is our rock-solid public transportation network. My visit to Dallas a couple of years ago has convinced me that Americans have no clue of this concept. Heck, I'm not even sure you guys ever heard of bycile lanes or walkways.
Sigged!
In the other scenario, box makes contact with other car so the G-force on the passengers is immediate and powerful, while the car begins to deform afterwards.
No, if you had an accident at least half of those people would of died. Call them a cab or have them walk it off on the way home. If you do not live in a city in which you can walk home at night, why are you living there?
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
Perhaps, but if the professional hired by a magazine to test-drive the SUV fucked up, what about the soccer-mom who drives the SUV day to day?
My point was that an SUV is much more likely to kill its driver than a small car. In a head-on crash between an SUV and a small car, perhaps the SUV driver is safer. But what about all other accidents? A small car, no matter how skilled its driver is, will have a greater chance to avoid accidents. In a real emergency, you may not be able to "drift" an SUV enough to avoid a crash, a small car is nimbler. And not everything is small cars, there are also other SUV's, 18-wheelers, rocks, trees, you name it, so many obstacles that a small car will drive around but the SUV will hit head-on.