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.
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.
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?
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
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)
Not actually 'free', but subsidised. Either your employer, your bank, the mall, or your town paid for the land, paid to have it paved, pays to have it maintained and striped routinely. Unless vast expanses of asphalt just appear by magic, someone is paying for it. And that someone is almost always us, either directly or indirectly.
Money that could go elsewhere.
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.