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!!"
Nothing is then SMART
by
tid242
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
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.
Let's not be a part of the problem.
-tid242
--
With a few exceptions, secrecy is deeply incompatible with democracy and with science. --Carl Sagan
Re:Not so SMART . . .
by
Dynamoo
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
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.
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 - ?
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.
Re:Not so SMART . . .
by
Maddog+Batty
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
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.
-- I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
Re:90 MPH????
by
Space+Coyote
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
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.
-- ___
Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.
Re:90 MPH????
by
Thangodin
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
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.
Slashdot Mirror
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
With a few exceptions, secrecy is deeply incompatible with democracy and with science. --Carl Sagan
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.
Never email donotemail@WeAreSpammers.com
Smart car are made by Smart
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 - ?
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.
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.
wot no sig
The rest of the world calls it Opel.
Otherwise known as Daimler Benz; been making quality automobiles since 1886. So, not much track record there.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
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.
___
Cogito cogito, ergo cogito sum.
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.