Slashdot Mirror
Smart Car Coming To the US In Jan. 2008
Blahbooboo3 writes "After many delays and missed promises, the Smart Car is finally coming to the US in January 2008. Smart Car uses a specially designed crash cage to protect the driver and gets upwards of 40 miles per gallon. Crash tests are very positive. The car is deceptively large inside, as showcased by this great ad from the Smart USA site. The second-generation Fortwo will be offered first, starting around $14,000. Unfortunately the slick roadster isn't coming any time soon."
For some reason when I look at the price all I think is that there are better cars for that price. Why would I buy one of those when I can get a yaris or scion that gets the same milage?
Firstly, you can change the bodywork easily for different designs. Secondly it's a Mercedes, Thirdly it can park in small spaces in cities which other cars can't.
I've seen them driving around Seattle for quite a while now.... Imports maybe?
We need smart drivers. My Dad told me a story this afternoon about a woman who bought an RV, drove it on the highway, set the cruise control, went back to make breafast, and, of course, the RV crashed. The woman sued the RV maker for not explicitly stating in the manual that she needed to be behind the wheel when on cruise control and won a million bucks. Whatever happen to common sense?
While I am all for more small and fuel efficient cars here, a $14K price tag seems like a bit too much. Why would someone spend that much on a car when they can get 4 door Toyota Corolla for around the same price with the same fuel efficiency? I would think that the $10K range would be more reasonable.
Do yaris or scions have the same protective cage?
I dont think that means what Smart think it means in the US.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
They've been selling these in Portland, Or for a couple months now.
These have already been in Canada for a year or so and judging by the number on the road, they've been selling well. I've spoken to a couple of owners and they love them. Apparently they cope well in the snow (not that we had much in Ottawa this past winter) so they should be perfectly viable in the northern States. Mind you there is something ludicrous-looking about them, especially when you see them next to the ubiquitous SUVs. People thought the same thing about the Morris Minor and the Mini Cooper 40+ years ago. Now, the Cooper is trendy!
is to ban SUVs. Even with a protective cage, I still don't think that a smart car could really withstand the impact of an SUV, esp. considering the SUV would probably drive right over it if the SUV was coming from behind. And given my experience with SUV drivers, more likely than not they are at fault for accidents.
SUVs are WMDs, lets ban them and we will save countless lives(of course those with small penises will be upset, but hey)
Monstar L
The Smart gets more than 40mpg; the most efficient Toyotas (in the US) get up to 36 (manual Yaris according to fueleconomy.gov).
If you want a Toyota comparable to the Smart, you're looking at an Aygo, which is even smaller than a Yaris and not sold in the US.
By the way, about those Scions: although the first-gen xA and xB had the same 104hp, 1.5L engine as the Echo and Yaris, the new xB and xD will have larger ones and will probably get less mileage.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Simply because it is cool! The Smart is the equivalent of the MAC.
It is mostly used by young people that creativity related careers like architects and designers. It is also quite common as a company car for innovative dynamic companies.
Besides, you can park perpendicularly in a street that only allows parallel parking.
Fear is the mind-killer.
I guess when it's your parents who tell you these whoppers, you wouldn't bother to check up on this urban legend with Snopes. You can take some consolation in the fact that Snopes points out that false rumors of this variety have been circulating since the late 1970's.
Simpli - Your source for San Jose dedicated servers and colocation!
Wow, a new car! That's so totally amazing that someone would... sell a car. What will they think of next?
... and then they built the supercollider.
http://shambala.net/misc/BigMan400%5B2%5D.flv
I see nowhere where it says Jan 2008
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
You can stick it in the back of your truck for when you need to get somewhere
inaccessible by normal means - like closer to the mall entrance than a
regular parking spot.
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
Who in th world would consider a Corolla sexy?
Yeah, being able to park nose in between two parallel parked cars on the street would be great for cities. But what the crash test video didn't show was what happens when you get hit by someone in a big SUV. The biggest selling point of the big cars these days is still safety for the people inside. Soccer mom don't give a shit about gas milage when it comes to protecting their babies.
We are all just people.
You say that as if it's somehow difficult to parallel park any of the other cheaper small cars in the US (e.g. Hyundai Accent, Toyota Yaris, Honda Fit, etc.).
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
The crash tests show that the driver would have not survived, or he/she would have survived with the legs being completely smashed, which guarantees a wheel chair or a bed for the rest of the life. However, this is a nice car to paint it with the logo of the local pizza delivery restaurant because it catches the eye with it's absurdly small size. and blonde girls will have an excuse to park it perpendicular and not sideways to the road as it will not stick out.
"Why would someone spend that much on a car when they can get 4 door Toyota Corolla for around the same price with the same fuel efficiency?"
:-)
Because people think they look cool and hip and fun. People buy cars as an expression of their personal taste as much as anything else, projecting an image, etc, not just on rational aspects like price/fuel efficiency. If that was the case we'd be following Henry Ford's line about having any car we want as long as it's black, we'd all be driving identical vehicles. Just go into a car showroom or auto shop and see how much money gets spent on accessories which do nothing but change the look of the same model cars.
Smart cars are purchased as much as a fashion statement as anything else in Europe, just as much as any other car.
In the UK the road tax on them is much lower than most cars because they have a smaller engine (0.7 litre), and they are pretty handy for urban parking as well
You can park it sideways in a parking space, for one, so no more parallel parking. :)
That's okay; the Smart Fortwo only seats two people anyway (hence the name), so it can't carry soccor moms' "babies!"
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
I've seen SMART cars on tractor trailers around Fife, south of Seattle. I think that Mercedes dealerships (or at least the one there) have been selling them.
I've seen these cars in Europe a long time ago already... Nice to see the US catching up.
When I saw it in that awful Ashton Kutcher movie. Since then I've found it's a real car, and not a large rollerskate.
I can't imagine buying one of these things. It looks totally freakish, and with it's tiny size you're get about zero respect from other drivers on the highway. And the milage is ONLY 40 mpg? What the hell? My Metro gets at least 34 on the highway, sometimes upwards of 38, and it's got 4 doors, is fairly roomy, and isn't even a hybrid or anything special. Maybe if it got 100 mpg and gas prices were twice what they are now, but no way I'd ever buy one otherwise.
AccountKiller
In the last couple of months I've seen a few new ForTwo's driving around the suburbs of Portland, including one in my neighborhood with a dealer plate on it.
No kidding. I swear, parallel parking is like a lost art in some cities.
I have a 1992 Honda Civic VX. It was rated 45/55mpg at the time of purchase. The worst it actually gets is 38. That's in the winter, driver over mountain passes with lots of acceleration, with over 200K miles on the car. The best it got was about 60 (just over 635 miles with 10.5 gallons). This is a 15 year old car, with 15 year old technology. It would smash the crap out of these smart cars, and its probably faster, too. My parents drove one (we have 2) on their anniversary to Mt. Rainier, and some large boulders fell on it (an one rolled underneath). Neither one of them got a scratch. The civic is stronger, faster, bigger, bets better gas mileage, has double-wishbone suspension, and doesn't look stupid. The original price was about 22.5K after tax and licensing and all that in Feb. 1992 dollars. I don't see ANY advantages to this smart car over my civic, except for the parallel parking thing (which I don't parallel park much anyway). I especially don't see all the hype with this car.
It is good, however, that small cars are back in fashion. Hopefully this will put pressure on the US market to include great high-mpg cars that are already sold in the EU (the GM/Opel Astra diesel hybrid comes to mind; I think it gets about 110mpg).
-Z
Because it's beautiful, and they are different things.
A Yaris is not a beautiful car, and a Smart is.
Buying a car is not about saving mney in gas, if that was the issue, the only sane way to buy cars would be following a TCO study of each model, because the price of the car is an issue in fuel economy.
Just look at Fortwo, taller than it is wide, and figure out what happens when someone runs a red light.
We are all just people.
Luxury, I'd guess (must have something to do with being related to Mercedes).
According to a coworker who bought a Smart for his wife (I'm living in Europe so we've already seen them around for some years), a Yaris and similar are sardine cans compared to a Smart.
So if I understand this correctly, we'll have the styling of a Mercedes, which many USians regard as unattractive, and the noisiness that Swatch watches were known for. Now all we need is the peeling paint job from the early years of the Chrysler/Plymouth/Dodge Neon, and we've got a real winner!
<sarcasm -- it's just a joke, people!>
It's a friggin 2-seat vacuum cleaner. Well, at least it wont fit *both* me, the wife and mother-in-law. 40 miles a gallon seems sweet (not gonna do the conversion to km/liter right now) but with a tank fitting no more than around 4 gallons of fuel you're *still* driving back and forth to the gas station all the time. Glad I never bought one.
Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
That might be the stupidest statement I've ever read at Slashdot, and I browse at -1.
Well, considering that, you'd think it'd be safer than other small cars in side impacts, because the door reinforcements are higher off the ground. Also, because it's so short, the side impact actually hits the A and B pillars, the front and back wheels (at the same time!), etc -- the stuff that's rather more solid than the doors.
In a side-impact crash, I would expect the Smart to be more likely to roll and get less smashed-in, meaning that the occupants would be at greater risk for whiplash but less risk for entrapment or getting crushed.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
You've obviously never seen what happens to a Yaris when it t-bones a Volvo XC90 at 45mph. Just happened here in town yesterday, scared the heck out of me. The Volvo had some bent metal, and the driver walked away. The Yaris was scattered across the intersection, and the driver was pulled out on a stretcher and taken to a hospital by helicopter.
The Smart car has Mercedes engineering behind it, and crashworthiness is superior to anything put out from Toyota.
The "SmartCar" is not a car for the energy and environment conscious population. While they get great fuel economy, they run on diesel fuel as opposed to gasoline. Diesel combustion engines release far more harmful byproducts into the atmosphere such as sulfur dioxide and other nasty stuff.
If you're looking at fuel efficiency for the sake of saving money, its great; but if you're looking at it for the sake of saving the environment, then either buy another, lobby for a gasoline version, or ride your bike.
Aikon-
p.s. This is at least the case in Canada; the situation could be different in other countries, and I really can't speak to that.
I've seen them used by pizza delivery businesses (not exactly innovative or dynamic), I suppose the easier parking does help with that too.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
I used to think the same thing, but guess what? I'm driving a brand new Mitsubishi Eclipse right now. The argument that they "immediately lose a bunch of resale value, the minute you drive them off the lot" is technically correct. But realistically, it doesn't mean as much as people pretend it does. In reality, MOST people buying a new car plan on keeping it for a while. The initial loss in value only affects someone who makes a poor purchasing decision and tries to trade the almost new car back in after only a few months through maybe the first year or two of ownership.
Meanwhile, loans on new vehicles tend to have much better interest rates than loans on used vehicles, so you're not giving as much of your money away to some bank as you pay off your car....
My new car also included such "bonuses" as free roadside assistance during the warranty period. Used car owners generally don't receive benefits like this, and have to pay for a "motor club" membership like AAA to get the same thing.
The warranty itself can be a factor, too. You may or may not get one with your used car purchase, depending on its mileage and all. But it could easily "make or break" the overall "value" of your purchase if something major like a transmission fails 2 or 3 years into the vehicle ownership.
Ultimately, for me, the assurance that my new car doesn't have some worn out part just waiting to fail and greatly inconvenience me when I need my car the most is the *best* reason for buying new. I only own one vehicle, and I count on it daily. If I'm supposed to go to a customer site and can't make it because my car breaks down, that costs me income from both ends at once on a used car that's not in warranty. (Loss of income on a job I can't do, AND loss of income paying for a car repair.) Generally, the dealership will even give me a free rental car while repairing mine under warranty - which they'd never do on used car repairs.
we need smart drivers and smarter officials
the biggest problem with roads is a lack of them
I live in the Tigard/Beaverton are of Oregon. I see these cars on the roady every couple of days and am aware of dozens of them and know several dealerships I can drive past and see them on the lot for sale. Anyone know the story of why it still keeps being said 'coming to the US in '08?
Yeah, those smarts are really good.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfguxvWPRZE
or not.
Good gas mileage - What is the price of diesel in your area?
That chance that it gets hit is only half as large as with a regular car!
Bert
I've seen a few driving around Portland, Oregon.
Check out the Consumers Union car reports. Check out LemonAid. http://www.lemonaidcars.com/
Mercedes isn't the most reliable car. It's not particularly good value for money unless all you care about is the fact that it's a Mercedes. Even in terms of status, Mercedes is slipping.
Toyota (makers of the Yaris), on the other hand, is fantastic for reliability. So, given the choice between a Smart and a Yaris, I would go for the Yaris. Unless gas gets to be a zillion bucks a gallon, the Yaris is a far better investment than the Smart or any hybrid that you want to name. The difference in the purchase cost between a hybrid or a Smart and a Yaris will never be made up by a savings in gas.
I would've stopped by and shot him in the head. You know, just to give mother nature and Darwin a helping hand.
Could be because they've been around here for a while now. Seen them at the dealer nearby and on the road occasionally for the last year or so.
So what are the benefits of Yaris over Smart?
Much better gear changing.
More powerful engines.
Better handling.
Better safety. (5 star rating against 3, great difference)
Better acceleration, deceleration, greater top speed.
Trolls are like broken clocks. They show the truth two times a day. The rest of the day they talk nonsense.
... sorry, but I think what we actually ) _need_ are smart DRIVERS.
Hell, the inflatable auto-pilot from Airplane had more skill than most of the morons on the roads these days.
montana (of all places) has had a dealer for a few years in bozeman.
http://www.ecoautoinc.com/smart.php
It's not so much about the resale value, because you're right, most people won't resell it. But when you can save 20% by buying a car that's 2 years old, the odds of making that much up with things failing anytime soon are sufficiently low that it's usually a good deal. Sure, there's a tiny chance something will fail quickly, but personally the only cars I've known that needed bigtime repairs were several years old. If you think there's a good chance, maybe you should be buying a different car.
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
The amount of sulfur content in the exhaust is entirely dependent on how much is fuel - it can removed during refinement, it just costs a little more. Europe has had strict requirements about sulfur content for quite some time, and the US and Canada both passed laws last year to do the same. As far as the other nasty stuff, catalytic converters and in-engine burn efficiency on diesels have improved to the point where that is really no longer a concern. The only downside that I know of is that some diesel vehicles still have problems getting started in very cold climates, and until the engine warms up may have higher particulate concentration? This might be a concern in canada - I haven't looked into it much myself as I live in the US SW.
Diesel is a great fuel for the economically minded as it is more energy efficient than gasoline, and can also supplemented with biodiesel to the extent it is available (which in turn is much much more efficient than ethanol).
The car was introduced in 1997 and I first saw one in person in 1999.
I've been waiting for it to be on sale in the US ever since. But after 2 car purchases myself, it's still not available.
Man.. we're talking about 11 years here.
If you are looking for a small fuel efficient car to fling through corners of a race track at high speeds, I guess the smart is not for you. For the 99.999% of non-brainless people who simply want a car to drive in the city, it's still a great choice.
My wife has had one for over a year (Canadian). We love it. So far my only regret is that we couldn't afford one for me as well.
The main competition when we bought it was from the Toyota Echo. The Echo had Toyota's reliability record (+400k on our 1990 Tercel), a back seat, an $1,800 cheaper price, and worse fuel economy. My wife does a lot of driving and I'm crazy, so we went for fuel economy and goofy eccentricity.
We just got a letter from Mercedes-Benz last week touting the new Smart coming out late this fall. There have been a few changes to the new model:
1) The vehicle is slightly larger. Not sure why this is necessary. The car will already carry two people on a weekly shopping trip that includes stops at Costco and the occassional 20kg sack of dog or cat food. The extra space will not be enough to make this a family car.
2) The engine will be gas instead of diesel. This might be a good thing for the mass market. The diesel Smart accelerates a bit like a diesel truck - forget the jack-rabbit starts away from stop signs, but once it's moving you don't have to keep it wound out to get up hills like you do with a small gas engine. If you are used to small gas engines it's easy to over-rev the diesel when you're learning to drive it.
Perhaps the switch is to deal with emission standards in states which don't sell ultra-low sulphur diesel yet? The main thing that annoys me about it is that the gasoline model will consume more fuel than the diesel - about 5 litres per 100 kilometres, or about what you'd expect from a small Toyota.
Maybe it's just my reaction to marketing bumpf, but I've got a bad feeling that the marketing droids might be over-riding the engineers and knackering the Smart for the North American market. They're going to have to drop the price if they want to compete with Toyota, at least once the supply of eccentrics dries up.
Where did they get that figure?
The actual figures according to http://www.whatasmartcar.com/ are 55 mpg city, 75 highway.
The European website says 3.3 or 4.7 liters per 100 km, depending on what engine you choose.
3.3 l/100km is 71 mpg, and 4.7 l/100km is 50 mpg.
Last time I looked, nowhere in the USA is it legal to park nose-in when you're in a parallel parking zone. Further, it's generally illegal to "create" parking spots out of nothing, so anywhere there are painted slots or meters, forget about squeezing in.
This isn't to say that an influx of microcars might not lead to a change in the laws, but it ain't that way yet.
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
"smart" with a lowercase "s" is the correct brand and car name.
Smart have been on sale in Canada since 2004. There are zillions on the road here in Vancouver. Once again the U.S. is behind the times, while us Canadians are on top of things. :-)
The current fad (everything is a fad in Vancouver) is for older Japanese imports. It started with Nissan Skylines, but you also see lots of Mitsubishi Delicas and Nissan S-Cargo vans. I've even saw a Toyota Hi-Lux pickup, the same kind Top Gear failed to destroy...
If they're more than 15 years old you can privately import them, but in true spoilsport fashion the Feds are talking about upping the minimum age to 25 years. Boo!
Right-hand drive makes parallel parking really easy, but they often have to fiddle a bit with the mirrors for safe passing on two-lane roads.
..laura who would rather privately import a Citroën CX
Please. If this was built by Toyota, it would be worthy of consideration. Considering the diaster of mercedes reliabiliy along with the outrageous cost of spare parts, the end-user-repair-hostile attitude of the mercedes organization (like volvo- another p0s nowdays-) What's a set of factory repair manuals for a merc cost nowdays- $3K? 5K? Can you even get them?? My toyota ones cost me about 100. Repair parts are widely available and toyota dealers compete on parts costs.
Like the new mini, this car is for clueless yuppies with slack jaws and "Ohh - Shiny" on their lips.
I've seen these sold with motorhomes and 'toyhaulers' in California and Nevada.
Instead of lugging a whole other car around, snowbirds can drive this little guy right up into the cargo bay of the 'toy-hauler' (a motor-home or trailer with a compartment for ATVs and other 'toys') or just pull it along behind.
These really should be plug in electrics though. And for its size, the mileage should be double that..
~!J!
It may not be worded politely, but Mercedes and BMW have lousy reliability records and are among the most expensive to repair. Detroit as better reliability, for Pete's sake.
Infuriate left and right
I heard myself an SUV owner saying, that he likes his toy, because if he gets into an accident, he would rather see the other guy, in a smaller car dead. It started maybe wih the Volvo's which were partially purchased for the same reason, as "family car".
Smart car drivers might be protected in a clever way.
Living in Ontarion, where carand tracks have the same speed limit, I liked very much the rules in Michigan, where trucks can drive upto 50 miles (I think) and cars upto 65 miles. This forces tucks eclusively to the right lane, while cars are in the other lanes.
Similar solution could be achieved by designating lanes and speed limits based on the vehicles mpg rating.
Trucks and low mpg SUVs could have lower speed limit, while high mpg smart and smaller cars could have a hiher speed limit.
This would create lanes for similar sized cars, so in case of accidents they would more likely to meet their matches, or a smaller (less impact) bigger vehicle.
is evident in many of these posts. The demonstrated lack of understanding in topics such as statics and dynamics, mechanics, mechanical engineering, crash dynamics, and automotive technology is astounding. Before anyone decides to flame me, I am an aerospace engineer, I build airplanes for one of the greatest living aircraft designers in the world. I am well educated in how cars are supposed to work. I am amazed at the number of Honda/Toyota fanboys that post in here saying things like tantamount to "my Corolla is teh greatest car evar and gets awesome mileage lol" and "my Civic can get the same mileage as the Smart so OBVIOUSLY the Smart car is stupid roflhehe." You just don't get it. What is the size of the engine in your Corolla or your Civic? How much power does it provide? How much power does the car require to maintain 60mph on a straight and level road on a standard day? You're talking about cars over 2,000 pounds. The gas engine in the Fortwo is a turbocharged 700cc 3-cylinder. There are motorcycles with higher displacement engines. And yet the Fortwo is still capable of dealing with traffic. Remember, the car is freaking tiny. It only needs 50-60hp to drive around and still be a useful car.
And don't give me this crap about "zomg the mileage of my corolla is fantastic." Its a load of bullshit. Take a lightweight econobox and you're sure to get decent mileage. Take some good engineering and you can give it a run for its money. I'll take the 27mpg that I get in a 300hp AWD turbocharged 4,000 pound station wagon any day over your Civic. I get a far more useful, safe, fun, and long-lasting vehicle than you ever will. Sure, I paid more for that wagon used than a new Civic, but I can drive _through_ a brick wall unscathed (Top Gear has demonstrated this in a Volvo 740) and you cannot. Are you willing to put a price tag on your life and the lives of your passengers? I'm not.
The safety of Civics and Corollas has never been their selling point. Why do you think they cost so much less than a comparably equipped VW, Volvo, or Mercedes? The cost cutting has to be somewhere, and it is in the safety engineering. I have been in or witnessed accidents with Volvos and Mercedes several times, and in most cases, the Volvo or Mercedes driver comes out ok. Sometimes the Volvo or Mercedes can even drive away from the crash. The same cannot be said for the other vehicle. There was time and effort put into safety by companies like these, and it shows. Mercedes has been a pioneer in safety systems forever; hell, they INVENTED the automobile. Mercedes has been using antilock brakes for over 70 YEARS. ABS isn't even standard on the Corolla. Volvo INVENTED the three point seatbelt almost 50 years ago, but look how long it took before other car companies gave enough of a damn to actually implement them. These are companies that know what they are doing, and are informed, and most of you clearly are not informed.
Wake the fuck up slashdot, this lack of education and knowledge is disturbing.
The crash test that is linked in the subject belongs to the first version of the Smart Car. You can find the Euroncap test information at http://www.euroncap.com/tests/smart_city_coupe_200 0/29.aspx (3 stars out of 5)
The 2008 version hasn't been tested yet, but hopefully it will get 4 stars in the same test.
>... and you won't get laughed at in them either.
That doesn't happen here in the uk, since the vehicle is seen as cool, distinctive and effective.
On the other hand the usa motor market that seems to think driving tanks with the same fuel economy as cars from 80 years ago is ok - they get laughed at, by everyone else in the world. Attitudes are changing this way, thankfully, and maybe one day the usa will 'get it'.
Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
If you have to get a loan for a freaking car, YOU CANNOT AFFORD IT! You are going into debt for something that will be worth less than your loan value. If you want debt, buy real estate. A car? Feh! All those "bonuses"? You paid more for them than they are worth to the car dealer! You think the car company gave you those for free???? Warranty? You paid more for that than it is worth. The car company knows what the cost of the warranty to them is, and they charge you MORE than that amount. Gah.
I am getting 33km/l (78 miles per gallon in twelve-finger units) in my Volkswagen Lupo 3L from 2001.
The Lupo can transport 4 persons and reach a top speed in excess of 165km/h (102mph in twelve-finger units). Read more here.
Volkswagen has now ceased building this gem - and well, I guess it would never sell in SUV-loving States of America anyway.
I don't drive a Mercedes, but honestly, what "status" car owner gives a shit about what Consumer Report says about them, or how much a repair manual costs? A DMC-12 might also suck according to CR, but I'd rather have it over any Toyota.
It's interesting how the advertisements and crash tests are for the British market, yet the car has not been modified to put the driver's side on the right.
Wow......a SUV that weighs 8000lbs.......
So smaller vehicles are the answer......guess we need semis and trains the size of pickup trucks.....it could happen.
Somehow I don't think the Fortwo is aiming to compete in the SUV space.
I have no idea why you would purchase the Americanized smart car. It seems like a waste of space. I just purchased the Canadian/European model which uses a diesel engine. Instead of a sissy 40 MPG I get about 70-74 MPG. Its intense, now I get to scoff at all of the people who drive vehicles other than mine because there isn't much that can beat it for gas mileage. I'm just glad I bought mine before this crap happened.
Seriously, what is it that USians have this thing for Mercedes and BMW. Those cars are usually driven by boring old business people and people of lower social class (e.g. whitetrash/trailer park types).
You're in the trap of thinking that all debt is bad debt. If I go out and buy a car based on the payment (which is how most schmucks do it) then yes, you're probably right. However, let's say that I'm just starting in the private sector. I've just graduated from college with a large (some might even call it 'crushing') amount of student loan debt. I've got a shiny, new "in the industry" job. Do I: a) Go out and buy a 10 year old car with money scraped out of my ashtray and pulled out of my couch b) Go out and buy a new (or nearly new) car on credit I would argue "b" -- if you want to keep that good job it's imperitive that you show up to work on time every day. You're not going to make the best of impressions when you call in on the third day and say you won't be in because your car just dropped it's transmission onto the road. And by the way, would your boss mind advancing you three weeks pay so you can cover the repair? It takes money to make money, so as long as you're spending wisely (e.g. a new Corolla, Scion, or Fit) you're probably not doing too badly in the financial management department.
Besides, you can park perpendicularly in a street that only allows parallel parking.
Does Mercedes offer an address to send all your parking tickets to?
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
That doesn't happen here in the uk, since the vehicle is seen as cool, distinctive and effective. Yeah, it's different cultures I guess. Speaking as an American, the smart car looks dorky, impractical and, frankly, dangerous on US roads.
They're already here for rental (at least at the Budget office by my house). I keep almost renting it, but it's about $66 a day (about twice what a basic economy car would cost to rent). Boy, I'm itching to drive that thing, though. It's parked out front of the rental place sometimes, and it's a work of art.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
I take this as a downside to the car, probably explaining the price. Mercedes is a car that really lives only by its past fame. If the smart is as poorly built as the recent crop of MBs, then that's a reason alone to steer away from it.
I just rented out a Smart for two days this week.
:(
I was skeptical at first, but figured I'd rent it for the experience. Having driven it for two days I'm a total convert. When you get into it, you notice that it not only has plenty of room inside for two people and their stuff, but that you actually sit higher up than in most regular cars. The car seems quite stable, even at speed up to 100kmh and probably faster, but I didn't really have a chance to take it any faster an this.
The suspension is maybe a bit too hard and sporty in it's feel, you can feel rough roads a bit too well. The interior quality was excellent and I like the dash design. The seats were very comfy and it was very easy to find a good seating position. Like I said, there's plenty of room for even big and tall people.
The engine is small and turbo charged and has plenty of oomh, though only at higher rpm's and you have to wait for the turbo to spool. It has six gears and an automatic transmission. You can use the shifter to go up and down the gears on your own or switch it into automatic. My only gripe is the automatic taking way too long to downshift when you want to surge, but supposedly that's been fixed in the newer version (ours was the 1st gen).
Really truly the best part was the pitiful amount of fuel it used. I filled the tank up as soon as I got it, and the gauge indicated a full tank (a very unscientific 5 bar gauge) when I returned it to the rental place. I actually felt a bit cheated by it, since I didn't use most of the gas I put in the tank
Like I said, I have reservations about high speed handling in an emergency. I've seen the crash test videos, and I believe the car to be safe enough in crash, it's avoiding one I'm still not sure about. The car does have every electronic measure available, ABS, stability control and other stuff, but I didn't want to test it on public roads.
On the other hand, most SUV's will flip easily if you do a high speed left-right, so it's a matter of being careful I guess.
My other gripe is the transmission, though I can live with it and as I said, it's been fixed in the newer model.
All in all, I'm seriously looking into buying one as a second car. A Smart would fulfill about 95% of my motoring needs, but I would still need my current large gas guzzler for transporting more than me and my spouse and driving to see our relatives through elk infested wintry roads at night.
Some say he is made with ascii, others that he is eyeballed daily by millions. All we know is, he is known as the Sig
The previous model of Smart got barely three stars(http://www.crash-test.org/marques/resultat.
And the Smart's handling. Pathetic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfguxvWPRZE
Trolls are like broken clocks. They show the truth two times a day. The rest of the day they talk nonsense.
No, no, no!!! It's because you can do this with it.
- Jonathan :)
No tuna is safe.
The Smart roadster will not be released at all because it is no longer in production by Smart
I live in a (Canadian) ranching area and people drive mostly trucks or beaters but I've noticed a number of smart cars in the last year. They look really funny in this environment but people like them. Perhaps it's a refreshing change, I don't know. Around here, most people understand mechanics better than they can read or write. Was anyone else here put off by the first sentence on their home page: "Would you like reserve your very own new 2008 smart fortwo?" I'm sure their engineering is more professional.
So smaller vehicles are the answer......guess we need semis and trains the size of pickup trucks.
That, or we need to be as strict with the licensing for every car as we currently are with the license for a semi or train. If you are going to drive a vehicle that is that dangerous to everyone else on the road, shouldn't you have to meet much stricter requirements?
We are all just people.
what happens when an excursion or a semi truck hits one of these toy cars? thats what i want to see.
But at 40mpg and $14,000 it's basically a 2 seat Civic. And my next car will probably be a one year old Civic.
And you can be sure that the rednecks down here in NC will pass some kind of law making it prohibitively expensive or uninsurable. Because as we all know, small is faggoty Eurocommunism. Down here in AMERICA, guldurnit, 75% all new Veee-hick-ul registrations are trucks and SUVs. Learn the damn rules.
I agree. For almost the same price I could get a Toyota Yaris sedan or a Honda Fit hatchback that actually has decent interior space.
Pretty much like any other car getting hit by an SUV - you'll get hurt and the SUV will crush up like a beer can, fall over and go on fire.
Most of us laugh at the twits who think the mercedes gives them "status". The rest of us have pity for them based on the very low reliability record of mercedes in general as shown in every years Consumer Reports car issue. People in the know have been fleeing mercedes to go to Lexus for years.
Mercedes and Lexus are two of the most common makes of cars used for taxis in the UK. 250,000 minicab drivers can't be wrong...
Have you seen the Brabus Smart Coupé, with the V6 engine? Basically two normal Smart engine blocks welded into one dinky little 170bhp go-kart.
Am I missing something on fuel standards? I had an 89 Honda CRX which looks like it was bigger than a smart car and it got 50mpg even when I had run 250000+ miles on it. I now have a BMW 328i sport coupe that gets in the high 30s and has 267hp. Why would I want a little car like that if I only get 40? Other than it is cheap and cute. But just purely on economic and enviromental impact, I don't get it.
Just Like Punch Buggy only with Smart Cars - We started it up a couple of years ago. Older buggies are disappearing from the road and you can't play punch buggy with New Bugs -ugh! - So we found that Smart cars had about the right amount of population on the road to allow the game to work without too much pain. Then we moved from Nova Scotia to Victoria,BC - it's like they come here to Breed or something.
The rock, the vulture, and the chain
...all we need are smart drivers.
The Smart Fortwo can park nose-in to the kerb. It only sticks out a little further at the back than the width of most cars. They're more-or-less square, viewed from above.
The website says that the roadshow is coming to Texas. I'm interested in the thing, but it better have a powerful air conditioner if it's going to sell in Texas.
In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
Rollovers are more dangerous on a per-crash basis than side impacts.
The smart roadster is coming to america as the ac ace. It looks fantastic too. Don't know what engine it'll have
r s/ac_ace.html
but if it has anything around 100nhp and they fix that gearbox they'll have a cracking good car.
It's already a blast to drive as it is (minus the gearbox).
http://www.diseno-art.com/encyclopedia/concept_ca
Well thought out response. Perhaps best I read on this page :)
Thank you.
Mercedes and Lexus are two of the most common makes of cars used for taxis in the UK. 250,000 minicab drivers can't be wrong...
I haven't seen the Lexus taxis but plenty of Mercedes sedans in Holland. Made a 3 night trip to amsterdam recently and the mercedes taxi that I took to the airport had 857K on the odometer. Not bad.
I agree with you. I drive the "poor-man's" German car - a VW Golf. It doesn't have the BMW logo (or price), but is just as safe. The very first thing I noticed about the VWs, BMWs, etc. are the heavy doors. My boss drives a BMW and was broadsided by a pickup. The pickup was smashed up but the only damage he had was the electronics in the door. He says his car is tank. I feel the same way in my VW. I forget that the doors are flimsy when I get into my friends' Toyotas and always slam them hard. I can physically feel the difference in safety getting into a German car (tank) vs. a Jap car (coffin on wheels).
I witnessed a huge accident at my local college. Some hotshot was speeding in his "ricer" and ran the light. That caused a chain reaction as he hit other Jap cars, a BMW, and a Mercedes. The Jap cars were pretty smashed up and the ambulance had to rush the drivers to the hospitals. However, the BMW's and Mercedes's drivers were fine. Their front ends were smashed in, but the driver & passenger compartments were fine. If you blocked out the front end, you couldn't even notice they were in a horrible car accident.
The only cars I ever buy from now on will be German. I can't wait until the new diesel engines are made available in the US. They run just as clean as gasoline and get better mileage. However, I will not give up safety for a few extra MPG's. I would rather pay more at the pump than pay for the rest of my life as a cripple if I get into an accident. Maybe my attitude will change once all the SUVs, full-sized pickups, and 18-wheelers are off of our roads some years after post-Peak Oil, but for the meantime I also want myself and my family to be in a tank when we are on the road.
That's okay; the Smart Fortwo only seats two people anyway (hence the name), so it can't carry soccor moms' "babies!"
... but if she plows through an Accord or a Neon somebody's still gonna die. Best not to have the accident in the first place, but that would require accepting some responsibility and actually learning how to drive. Frankly, given the poor track record of SUV drivers as a class, I think they should be required to obtain a CV license. What, that's too much trouble? Tough ... get a minivan.
... much as I detest fools with clamshells glued to their heads I dislike my government assuming that I am one even more. And I really can't stand it when government bans specific behaviors with the express (albeit unstated) purpose of increasing ticket revenues.
Besides, the reason soccer moms drive those damn SUVs is that they are just as hooked on the feeling of power as any male driver: maybe more. They may say "It's for the children!" but that's unadulterated pure baloney. There are plenty of comparatively safe vehicles that don't require a V8, enclose enough space to serve as an aircraft hangar, and need a "WIDE LOAD" sign on the back.
If they cared about those babies (much less all the other women around them driving their babies) they'd drive their vehicles more safely. If they really cared they wouldn't have chosen an overpowered four-wheeled behemoth in the first place. Sure, our hypothetical soccer mom may be more likely to survive an accident in a Yukon
Regardless, cell phone usage should be treated the same way as any other potentially dangerous behavior: we'll trust you to know what you're doing until you screw up. Then we'll take it away from you until you learn your lesson. Pre-emptive banning and presumptive ticketing are punitive and paternal
Focusing on a single attribute of an overarching problem is typical behavior of politicians who either don't know how to deal with the issue, or know that they'll never convince the population to do what has to be done to fix it. Bad driving is becoming endemic to our society: cell phones contribute to that but they are not the root of the evil. Matter of fact, trying to fix this particular problem with laws and penalties is akin to trying to cure diarrhea by tinkering with your toilet.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vExpEl0_5-Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I96S9vygn1o
I drive a gen 6 Celica (only the 1.8l admittedly) & get >40mpg. And I don't drive like Miss Marple either...
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
They are selling smart cars right now in Honolulu. Google it.
"Attitudes are changing this way, thankfully, and maybe one day the usa will 'get it'."
The USA already 'gets' it. It takes a while for the new cars to phase in. (300 mil population and all.) In the mean time, you can throw a rock in Los Angeles without hitting 5 Prius's.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Soccer mom don't give a shit about gas milage [sic] when it comes to protecting their babies
Actually, soccer moms don't give a shit about anything at all, including other people on the road. Soccers moms are one of the greatest hazards out there. I ride a motorcycle and have fortunately lived through many a near-miss from lane changing soccer moms in full battle armor and cell phone.
-- Posted from my parent's basement
Smart has always lost money and lost a lot more money than Chrysler has ever lost yet they sell the Chrysler Group. Smart is part of the Mercedes Car Group and Smart has never been profitable. Buy American. Buy a Chrysler/Jeep/Dodge.
See, there's your problem right there. You're using someone else's money to buy the car, so it's not actually yours, is it - until you've repaid the loan.
I got into debt once - it was hell (actually, it was my 20s) but no more, no sir. I don't own my house but then neither do any of my neighbours, they just think they do...
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." -- Goethe
I'm sorry to have to burst your bubble, but 40mpg is nothing. Most cars in the UK can do this. My 1987 Vauxhall Astra (1.3L engine, petrol) regularly gave me 43mpg (and lasted 13 years before it was written off by thieves. My girlfriends Skoda Octavia 1.9L diesel can get about 60mpg on a good run and averages 54mpg including urban commuting. If you don't know what a Skoda Octavia is it is an Audi A4 with a different skin styling - made by VW/Audi group - they own Skoda and Seat.
It is a true indictment of how wasteful car designs and usage are in the US that you think 40mpg is newsworthy. BTW, your $3.50/gallon petrol is cheap. We pay £0.97 per litre - thats $1.94 per litre to you, or about $9 per gallon. So when you complain about your "high" US petrol, sorry, gas, prices, you are complaining about something that is not high at all.
You're in the trap of thinking that all debt is bad debt.
And your in the trap of false dichotomy.
Do I: a) Go out and buy a 10 year old car with money scraped out of my ashtray and pulled out of my couch b) Go out and buy a new (or nearly new) car on credit I would argue "b" -- if you want to keep that good job it's imperitive that you show up to work on time every day.
how about c) Buy a car like my Jetta which cost 5k and over the last two years has required a new muffler. I could probably still sell the car tomorrow for the same 5k it cost me.
We have had these on the roads in Canada for several years now.
They are suitable for single or couples, since they are for 2 passengers.
If you have kids, it is not for you. At least not as the only car.
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
Dude, a car like yours loses $5k to $10k in the first 2 or 3 years.
How much does an AAA membership cost? $70 a year or something like that?
A new transmission or engine is around $2500 to less than $5k and despite what the people who want to you buy extended warranties would have you believe, it is exceptionally rare for those to fail in a properly maintained vehicle within 10 or 20 years.
What was your argument again?
They originally had a deal with ZAP! from California who distributed them ONLY to their "licensed franchises" (those that paid $50K for the right...)The ZAP! Smarts are no longer even on their website!
Now it appears that anyone can buy them direct from G&K as long as they buy 10 cars. Wholesale price is around $24K for these and they only convert the top of the line Passion model and the Passion cabrio.
The resale prices of these will go in the toilet as soon as the 2008 model is available from "official" channels and "real" smart dealers will not do any work on the older converted models as the converted models have had their computer systems reverse engineered and tweaked to meet US EPA standards. I don't think the converted ones will work with smart's computer diagnostics either.
I have some friends that paid close to $30K for one of these and they have no regrets, they are all Early Adopters and are used to this nonsense.
The money is nothing. But right now they have a car that says "LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME!"
note: I drove one of these around the US for several months a couple years ago when a German friend brought it here on a "Tourist Visa".
It was a bunch of fun to drive and everyone I spoke to said "Everyone should drive one of these", but when I asked them if THEY would buy one or let their KIDS drive one, most everyone said "NO WAY!"
They wanted to wrap their kids in a much sheet metal as possible so they were "safe".
I like microcars
Fully agree. Given the various harms monster vehicles cause, the only way to rationally preserve people's freedom to drive them is to take steps to make their owners bear the costs imposed on all other motorists by their self-indulgent vehicle choice.
First, increase the gas tax until the drivers of heavier vehicles are paying their fair share of the road repair bill. (There are very rational arguments for subsidizing road wear caused by heavy vehicles, such as semis, used commercially. There are no rational arguments for subsidizing excess road wear by mindlessly heavy personal vehicles.)
Second, actuarially increase insurance premiums for large, poorly performing vehicles until they are in line with the extra deaths caused by those vehicles in collisions with rationally sized vehicles.
Third, given that truck-based vehicles in particular are much more challenging to drive safely than average cars (as they take much longer to stop, have less body control which means more likelihood of losing grip, and are far more prone to rollover), require special licensing. Of course given the variety of vehicles on the road any line we draw between normal vehicles and heavy, trucklike vehicles is likely to be arbitrary. But I'll propose one anyway: To drive a vehicle for personal use that is EITHER over 5000 pounds empty OR over 78" tall, you need a Class C CDL with the attendant training and much tougher skills test.
It shouldn't Roll in an accident, unless by 'roll' you mean tip over.
In 1983 I had a car that routinely got 45 mpg. I have a 16 year old car now that does 37 mpg, AND it doesn't look like a complete ridicule-magnet that the Smart does. It's not cheap, it's not smart, and all it is, is a target for vandalism. Why would anyone buy this?
That's just silly ...
...
I have a wife and one child. I also have two cats. My sedan is fine to drive around the city but when we want to drive to our other home two adults, one child and two cats (in carriers) will not fit so we're going to need to get an SUV just to manage that. (We don't have one atm, but we plan on one.)
If you have one or two kids and a pet or two an SUV is just practical, it's nothing to do with a 'power trip' or whatever.
I will admit a station wagon would also work but I couldn't possibly
]{
The Canadian site specs the gas mileage at 4.2l/100km or about 56.2mpg. http://www.thesmart.ca/index.cfm?id=4904
I too, thought the mileage was weak compared to my 14 year old diesel Jetta that easily gets 45mpg and has over 414 000 kms on it (257 000 Miles). However, I've talked to owners at the pumps and they've claimed to get mileage much higher than that, closer to 72mpg.
I got into debt once - it was hell (actually, it was my 20s) but no more, no sir. I don't own my house but then neither do any of my neighbours, they just think they do...
Ofcourse, your neighbors at some point will in fact own their homes, while you will have paid for someone else to own your home. If you're paying money to rent a place, better for the rent to count towards ownership.
Or a minivan. Or a crossover.
You realize that what you've just admitted is that you're ...
1) putting most other drivers around you at risk, because of your high bumpers, poor braking and handling, and excess weight; ...
2) paying who knows how much extra in gas, and putting the resulting extra CO2 into the atmosphere;
3) actually *sacrificing* space compared to rational people-moving vehicles (because of your high floor and long hood)
... because you're insecure about how you look.
Wait for times to be tough and get a zero percent loan, like they had about a year ago. Then they're basically giving you money, if only because the money you pay them will be worth less 3 years from now.
So you used to think the same thing, and then you forgot how to do math?
Realistically, you spent a lot of money you didn't have to spend to get a very comparable value. If that car loses, say, $5k over two years, then you could have saved $5k buying a two year old car. That's $5k you'd have in your pocket right now that you threw out the window buying a brand new car instead of a slightly used car.
Warrantees are never worth it, unless you are very unlikely.
AAA is cheap. Dirt cheap.
A car failure on a fairly new car is fairly rare. If you're that worried about it, then do your regularly scheduled maintenance, NOT at the dealer. You'll see it costs half as much as they would charge you, rendering that great deal warrantee moot. Shit, you could RENT a car if you really needed to, many times.
Finally, as others have said, if you have to take out a loan to buy the car, you shouldn't be buying the car. You buy something you can afford, and then save money toward your NEXT car, which you buy outright, slightly used, and save yourself thousands and thousands of dollars. Unfortunately, I learned this lesson late, and I'm paying for a car I had to get in a rush when another car died, and I had not prepared ahead of time. But I'll drive this one until it's paid off (bought used, of course), and then I'll drive it until I have enough saved up to get another one OR longer...
As Mr. Dave Ramsey says, driving a brand new car is like throwing a hundred dollar bill out the window once a week on your way to work. Maybe the "convenience" and the "peace of mind" are worth thousands of dollars to you, and that's fine.. that's completely valid. If I had more money than I could spend on stuff I really care about, I too would buy a brand new car and smile.
But don't pretend it's a fiscally defensible decision.
A couple years ago, when I walked through the factory in Böblingen I saw "posters", basically, admonishing people to not even use the word Mercedes.
They seemed REALLY intent on keeping Smart as a separate entity. Has that changed now?
"Consistency is contrary to nature, contrary to life. The only completely consistent people are the dead." A. Huxley
bodywork easily for different designs ... and I haven't seen anyone actually changing the color of their car by buying new bodyparts. Probably the most expensive color change ever.
Dunno about US but here in EU if you change the design of your car you have to get new documents. Btw, those bodywork parts are not cheap in any case,...
--
It's about 650$ for a full change, with another car I had to pay more for just redoing the backside.
--
I have 3 sets.
Secondly it's a Mercedes
Reliability-wise I would own a Toyota over a Mercedes any day of the year.
---
Well, you never had one, that's for sure.
No trunk. Less space than a Prius. Lame.
I really hope there was sarcasm here, because if not, you're contending for the stupidest person on Slashdot award.
New formula diesel is now mandatory in the US. FYI.
"Consistency is contrary to nature, contrary to life. The only completely consistent people are the dead." A. Huxley
I got a VW rabbit (diesel) in 1980 that got 55 mpg highway and 42 mpg city.
How come I can't get a car with better mileage than that by now?
Two adults in the front seats, child in the rear seat with the two cats (still in their carriers) and luggage in the trunk. Why can't you just drive a sedan again?
Of course it depends on speed, hills, wind, etc (which many ignorant posters ignore, just wanting to bash something) but many Smart owners are averaging about 3.6L/100km. The thread below points out how variable mileage is and the effects of individual cars and driving style of course...
= 7604&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0
Wake up people, or should I say sheeple. Get yourself some facts before flapping your jaws.
http://www.clubsmartcar.ca/forums/viewtopic.php?t
Mercedes and Lexus are two of the most common makes of cars used for taxis in the UK. 250,000 minicab drivers can't be wrong...
In the US, the most common makes for Taxis are Ford Crown Victorias, along with other larger domestic sedans (Tauruses, Impalas). The reason seems to be that they are relatively cheap to buy, and they are easy to get parts for, and easy to fix (espectially for the Crown Vic).
Can't really say the same for BMW or Mercedes. Could it be that the only large sedans available in the UK?
If it passed the Swedish Elk Test then it probably won't roll over as easily as we think
how about c) Buy a car like my Jetta which cost 5k and over the last two years has required a new muffler. I could probably still sell the car tomorrow for the same 5k it cost me.
Glad to hear you've had good luck with your Jetta, but I wouldn't recommend anyone else to buy one - they are one of the worst cars on the road.
Err, yeah. What do you mean when you speak of a vehicle rolling or rolling over in an accident?
"Hey, the third matrix movie would have been good except for the plot,story, and acting." --AC
In a side-impact crash, I would expect the Smart to be more likely to roll and get less smashed-in, meaning that the occupants would be at greater risk for whiplash but less risk for entrapment or getting crushed.
In other words, good lawsuit material for you rather than your family. I think we have a winner!
Not a typewriter
I think everyone knows that SUV drivers have very small penises... And that includes the women...
Code, Hardware, stuff like that.
Already done!
Oh, wait, you meant making semis and trains smaller, didn't you? Nevermind.
"Hey, the third matrix movie would have been good except for the plot,story, and acting." --AC
Fortwo, where are you?
-
My father drives a semi and he couldn't agree with you more! His favorite object of complaint are the large motor homes that people drive and he makes a good argument: How can a person drive something that is potentially bigger then his semi (compared to when he's pulling a short trailer) do so without any special treatment, especially when they are more likely to be old.
It probably doesn't help that we live in the retirement state (Florida).
The popularity of SUVs is interesting to me, if nothing else as a testament to the power of marketing. The past dozen years or so have seen an endless flood of TV commercials depicting sociopathic individuals performing illegal (or at least antisocial) acts in their SUVs. Those ads successfully turned me off to the idea of ever owning one of the things (I'm a minivan owner myself, but then again I'm a pragmatic sort partial to, as you say, rational people moving vehicles.)
... it's just that SUVs make them that much more dangerous.
There was one ad that showed two skinny blonde suburban housewife-types in their giant machines approaching the sole remaining space in a parking lot. Both were shown as being very bad-tempered and irritable, and the camera cut back and forth between them to show the quickening tension as they neared their target. Finally, the apparent loser lost it completely and drove over the curb and up a grass-covered hill to get there first. To whom are they trying to sell these things, exactly? Terrorists? It's bad enough that people drive these things like weapons but do we really have to give them more ideas?
A number of other ads seem targeted to the arrogant yuppie personality. The one that lives for his car and his trophy wife and doesn't really have time for anyone or anything else. Basic courtesy is a foreign concept to these people because of their I COME FIRST philosophy. Frankly, I wish someone would take the automakers to court over the number of people that have died because of their (admittedly successful) marketing of powerful vehicles to nitwits. I know, I'm shifting responsibility away from the driver (where it belongs), but any way you slice it, the manufacturers put loaded guns in the hands of idiots. And they're still doing it, knowing full well that a significant portion of their customer base should never have been allowed to operate such vehicles. Or any motor vehicle, for that matter
Yes indeed, just the kind of people I want sharing the road with me. The only bright spot in all this is that they kill themselves off at a higher rate than the rest of us do, which gives me hope that natural selection will eventually take care of the problem. I mean, I take the expressway twenty-five miles to work each way, and it's rare when I don't see at least twisted, mangled mass of charred metal and plastic that used to be an SUV.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
As the owner of a Scion I can assure you that I almost never see that kind of mileage. I am pleased when I exceed 36 mpg on the highway.
"You can't allow somebody to commit the crime before you detain them." [Condoleezza Rice]
and the land that invented the Smart car, I can tell you that they do 53 miles to the gallon (that's a British gallon). At least that's what all my colleagues back in Scotland told me. The Roadster is really, in all honesty, quite cool looking in a kids-car-with-a-real-engine sort of way. In Senden there is a huge Smart Car automat. Use your credit to pay 14,000 euros and a brand new Smart Car is dispensed like a bottle of coke.h ange (Spaghetti Junction), I sort of think you wouldn't want to be on the German Autobahn in one of those ickle Smart Cars. The most elementary principles of Newtonian physics suggest to me that if my Toyota truck was to even touch one as it passed me at 200kph (the truck does 140 kph and no I don't have miles on the dial) the Smart Car would be toast.
Needless to say I could put one of them on the back of our Hi-Lux as a spare - in fact a famous German multi-millionare has a huge camper van the size of the QE2 and he has a Smart Car in the back. Maybe Al Gore has one in the back of his Lear Jet.
Having driven on the UK's motorways (max speed 70 mph) in a Mini and experienced the utter dread of passing a truck in the middle of a rainstorm on the Gravelly Hill Interchange http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravelly_Hill_Interc
Germany is the safest place on earth to drive a car (at mentally ill speeds) but I promise you, 88 million people owning three vehicles each does something to the stats. I have seen more road traffic accidents here than I had hot porridge back home. When you see a saloon class Mercedes estate shredded at the side of the Autobahn, it provides a perspective when you come to purchase a new motor.
Besides have you ever tried to grind your way up the Reschenpass on your way to some snowboarding joy in a Smart Car?
Oh hang on, where will I put the snowboard... er wait a minute there's only room for a single bag of groceries from Tesco's (for US slashd'ers read: Publix followed by Homeric type drool mmm!) in the footwell of the passeger seat and there is no back seat. Of course if you happen to be Tom Hanks and Audrey Tatou you will have no problem driving one of them in reverse gear at 100 mph through the streets of Paris with no significant damage to the engine. As demonstrated in that scientifically accurate movie - The Da Vinci Code.
Er... do we still say 'not' on slashdot?
Did we ever?
Posts, MyBio or Sig, may contain satire, sarcasm, bolded nouns be sardonic or even witty & be Church of SD
We've had smartCars available in Canada since late 2004/early 2005, and I see them frequently on the road here (Winnipeg). It never fails, anytime I mention that I wouldn't mind getting one, people always bring up the crash/safety issue. Try to argue that I commonly ride my bicycle in heavy traffic, not willingly - there aren't many cycling paths here - that's dangerous. People ride motorcycles at high speeds - that's dangerous too. Why is everyone a safety freak when it comes to the smartCar? Incidentally, from my personal experience, males are much more opposed to the car than females are.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got some idea balls to remove from a manatee tank.
Where the heck are these lexus minicabs? Knightsbridge? Minicabs here up north are diesel skodas or random japanese stuff. ( With cages for whippets or ferrets to comply with local laws )
They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
Try two adults and four kids. That was my family when we were growing up. We never had an SUV. The typical seating arrangement when we all went somewhere was Mom and Dad up front with one kid between them and three kids in the back. Was it cramped? Sure, but rare were the times when we all had to be piled into the car at the same time.
Nowadays, I would suggest against that arrangement for safety reasons (this was when most cars didn't even have seat belts). Still, there is nothing wrong with two adults up front and three kids (or one kid and two cats, in carriers) in the back of any modern sedan.
I can't believe that someone out there actually thinks that two adults, one child, and two cants (in carriers) will not fit in a sedan. I mean, really. Damn. Not only can they safely fit, but quite comfortably.
By your standard, almost every family in the country should have an SUV.
No, that is silly. It wouldn't even have crossed my mind to use something bigger than a Ford Ka for two adults, a kid and two cats. Do you own lions or something?
(No, really. That last bit was a joke, but come on!)
"I think I am a fallen star. I should wish on myself."
I think the reason that it seems like people are more safety-obsessed about the SmartCar is basically because the un-safety-conscious are already driving other vehicles.
If you are OK with the risk that driving a motorcycle entails, then you probably already have a motorcycle. They're fairly inexpensive, get great mileage, are easily available, and nobody will really look at you funny for driving one. Yeah, depending on the climate, there are some people who would be OK with the risk associated with commuting on a motorcycle, but don't do it for other reasons (e.g., it's too cold, they don't want to change in/out of riding gear at work, etc.), but I think the #1 issue is perceived risk.
With that in mind, I think 'nontraditional' vehicles like the SmartCar mainly appeal to people who would be interested in something like a motorcycle, but are put off because of the risk -- so in considering the SmartCar, that's going to be their first consideration.
Personally, and I say this as a person who is not normally all that risk-averse, I've been interested in getting a motorcycle for a while, but I'm just not sure that I trust the drivers around me enough to want to ride one in the traffic where I live (DC Metro area). I've been rear-ended, driving a big SUV, several times in traffic in the space of a few years (not enough to damage the car, and usually at very low speed, twice just because the driver behind me wasn't paying attention and just rolled their car into me in traffic)...I know I'm not going to live forever, but I really don't want to go out because some asshole on 495 didn't check their blind spot when they were changing lanes and splattered me all over the pavement. A SmartCar would be an interesting alternative, if it's somewhat safer, offers enough performance to make it at least not unpleasant to drive, and if it becomes popular enough to not be completely odd to be seen in one.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
I know of at least 2 dealerships selling these in Beaverton, OR. I don't get this 'coming in 2008' crap.
Perhaps its a pilot program here because we are already known for our environmentalism bent and tons of alternate driving options (FlexCar, StreetCar / LightRail) in the Portland Metro Area.
...where are our driverless single-family transports, powered by an electrified highway? We have the technology, don't we?
No, no sig. Really.
ThePromenader
40MPG? For the size of the car, that's crap.
The Honda Fit is 36MPG combined, and it's a 4-door car that you can actually put stuff in. It's around $14,000.
The Toyota Yaris liftback is 37MPG combined, and it still has an (albeit small) back seat. It's around $12,000.
We already have small cars in the US. They already have good economy and they are already selling well. Sacrificing the back seat for a small increase in mileage isn't going to sell very well.
And, if you're going to spend a little more, there's always the Toyota Prius. Most people get mileage in the high 40s (48MPG on mine, currently), and it's positively huge compared to the smart.
I still don't get this smart car thing. I have a used 1998 Saturn that gets between 39-40 MPG. Things like the Prius get about 10 more MPG and yet are many many times more complicated and expensive to fix. Why are cars now being marketed as being the best at gas mileage when Geo Metros were more or just as efficient 10+ years ago.
The average SUV rates extremely poorly in most modern crash tests. Alongated frames cause pressures on the car ranging from cracking the chassis in half to actually making the doors inoperable after any decent sized bump. I don't care about the mileage they get, all I know is that your average Renault Megane will keep the kids safer, is less likely to kill pedestrians, and is good deal more wallet friendly.
When the heck will people learn that bigger cars does not equal more safety?
Because until very recently, most people weren't willing to pay extra for, or use as a selling point when choosing between vehicles, fuel economy.
It's really only since the price of gas has hit $3/gal(US) that anyone here in the 'States has started to care about fuel efficiency. At least in the mainstream market -- the VW Diesels have always been popular with some folks I know (and I used to own one, great car) who were really into fuel economy, but the price-premium you pay for the diesel engine doesn't pay for itself in gas savings for upwards of 150k miles in late-90s gas prices. That's longer than many Americans own cars for. (At least, it's longer than many Americans who buy new cars -- and consequently have the most direct effect on what auto makers produce -- keep their cars for.)
Personally I find the popularity of hybrids interesting, because it's mostly irrational, at least in the financial sense: when you factor in the upfront cost and eventual battery maintenance, a hybrid is an even slower payoff than a diesel (there was a good analysis of them in Consumer Reports fairly recently), yet they've become far more popular. I think it's because of the "green" cachet they have, and because some places give you nice bennys for driving them (drive in the HOV with one passenger, special parking, toll discounts, etc. I know a lot of people who bought hybrids just for the HOV privileges last year).
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
My 2 door hatchback Geo Metro could easily get 50mpg no problem.. it's ridiculous that this car, although very cool and somewhat gas efficient, costs $14,000.. that is INSANE.. the purpose of these crappy little cars is that they are supposed to be cheap.. i remember seeing the estimated price tag on Zap's website years ago and it was predicting $10,000.. why the sudden jump? hell, the Yaris is only $10k-11k.. ahh well.. atleast we'll start seeing them soon..
*plays the Apogee theme song music*
You're aware that the dollar has lost about 1/3 of it's value over the last few years.
Deleted
I do. I owned two because my dad was a big mercedes lover. Got my mom's used one when I was sixteen (an older one I worked my ass off the previous two years to afford), and then a second hand-me-down when I was 22. Used to be a big Mercedes fan, know all the history, went to the Stuttgart Museum, lust after a Gullwing and the Prototype C111 in the 70s, etcetera. My parents got the M class.
The quality is crap since the 80s and you pay through the nose - whether dealer, independent mechanics, whatever. Parts cost too much, qualified and good mechanics who have the specialized tools to far and few in between = costly hour charges. Everytime, you can look forward to a costly electrical repair (power windows, antenna, whatnot). Both cars cost me much more in repairs than purchase price over the years while I drove low miles (10K a year) - and I bought them from my mother - the most conservative driver there was! The problems is not the powertrain, but the electrical system, and sensors. They suck.
They are not happy with their M class either. Crappy dealer service, things that shouldn't be are breaking 50K in. The luster from the 3 pointed star is forever gone in my eyes.
Bought a new honda a few years back and am much happier. Nil repairs, has all the features I use (except power seats, but no big deal - I'm the only driver - don't change position), has the power I need, and it's cheaper even though its new bought than a used low end benz. And the high end Benzes are even worse in reliability according to consumer reports.
The trick is to buy the used car from one of these people who made a "poor" purchasing decision and tries to resell it after only a few months to a year of use. Maybe a little more. A $8,000 loan is much easier on the budget than a $13,000 load... Big difference. Especially if you can avoid the used-car-dealer middle man and buy directly from a trustworthy owner.
At my credit union, the rates are the same:
http://www.myconsumers.org/site/rates.html
So get AAA. $88/year for road side assistance. Big deal.
True, the warranty on my used Hyundai was cut in half when it was resold to me. But I did have some coverage.
There could just as easily be a factory defect just waiting to fail.
I'm unconvinced that buying new is the best financial decision. That isn't to say that there are no advantages to buying new. I'm just saying that it is somewhat of a luxury. For someone on a tight budget, a smart used car purchase usually makes the most sense. Let the people willing to pay the for the luxury of having a new car pay the cost of driving it off the lot.
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
Considering I pay 2.9% to borrow the cost of my car, and I can easily make double that investing my savings, I have to disagree with you on that part of things.
Blah. Thats the only smart thats worth considering.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Or a MINI Cooper, better resale value and over 40mpg, and it's actually a great car, with awesome handling and acceleration.
I find any article that calls 6500 pounds "four tons" unreliable. 6500 lbs is already quite large-- why exaggerate? How else are they stretching the facts?
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
To add to the station wagon comment; I once half-heartedly joked to my wife that I was going to pick up a taurus station wagon, because they're dirt cheap. We then both bought cars - me a Grand Marquis, and her an F150 (both V8s)
:) My wife loves the car, but it's funny to see her yell when I call it a station wagon.
We found we didn't use the F150 as much as we'd like, so 3 weeks ago we purchased a Ford Freestyle. It's a crossover, but if you look at it just right, it's really just a station wagon
heh.
Karnal
If the original smart is not powerful enough for you, you still can fix that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gseTGwppbg
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
The Octavia is built on the Passat platform, not the A4.
You've got a cheap version of the most boring car on the road.
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
Neat little car but if I'm going to be forced to drive one I want it to be built like this -> http://youtube.com/watch?v=UPu0Dbe9nMA Now that would be fun!
Build it, Drive it, Improve it! Hybridz.org
I wonder why small cars are so expensive in the US? In Europe they have several economy class models for around $6000 (The Dacia Logan, the Zastava 10, and at least 3 Russian models).
With that being said, your third point is uniquely compelling.
Never happen
Detroit and Exxon/Mobil would have a field day lobbying and claiming lost jobs to the politicians that run the government. Ford makes maybe 1-2,000 for each Ford Focus. Meanwhile they make $9,000 for each Ford Explorer sold. Maybe this is why they have been refusing to put fuel cell focuses on the market? Its clear what their financial interests are.
SUV owners would revolt and vote. Most rich white voters who are male and own such vehicles vote more than any other group which is why the republicans have been winning so many elections. You do not want to piss them off.
Also we do already subsidize suvs and trucks. Why do you think are premiums have been rising so much over 7 years? To pay suv owners so theirs do not go up as much and revolt.
http://saveie6.com/
I agree. Save up for a new-to-me car that has been repossessed from someone like King TJ.
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
Exactly: "I want the other guy to die." People who buy SUVs for "safety reasons" are reptillian. (If only their parents had eaten them when you were young).
The initial loss in value only affects someone who makes a poor purchasing decision and tries to trade the almost new car back in after only a few months through maybe the first year or two of ownership.
It also affects you when you don't buy that used car.
I always buy my cars out of the auto trader magazines, less than a year old from the guy that made the poor purchasing decision. I pay cash and usually about 20% less than new. My last car had a $22K sticker price new... I bought in 8 months old with 5K miles on it for $16K.
The only thing is you don't always get the exact color/option you like.
You need a child safety seat which occupies half the back seat and the carriers are too large too fit. Trust me, I tried every which way.
]{
I live in the UK. From fairly recent personal experience, you do not get Mercedes and Lexus minicabs in London, Leeds, Manchester, Glasgow, Sheffield or Newcastle. That's most of the major UK population centres. I doubt they're widely used as taxis anywhere else in the UK either. You get black cabs, which are typically LTI TXs and FXs - these are the classic London black cabs - or people carrier (minivan) conversions. Mercedes and Lexus aren't in that market because you can't get a wheelchair in one. You also get minicabs, which are universally bog-standard saloon cars - Vauxhall Vectras, Ford Mondeos and the like. I've not seen a single Lexus minicab in the UK and I've seen about two old Mercs.
Now, the kind of cars you get picked up in to go on your business class flight (I guess the equivalent of a limo in the US - I don't know what they're called, I just know them as cars rather than cabs or minicabs) are indeed often Mercedes or Lexus, but the cab you call to get home from shopping in the rain will almost certainly be a black cab or a standard saloon car.
Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
You know I am not planning to get a Suburban or anything like that. I consider a crossover a small SUV. I have no special love for the SUV. I've never owned one and I am happy with my existing sedan.
...
:-)
:-)
Anyway to answer your questions
1) Actually, according to consumer reports. The SUV I plan to buy is as safer as the sedan I drive
2) Hybrid
3) I tested my requirements and 2 adults, 2 children with safety seats and 2 pets in carriers all work. This is purely a question of the design of the vehicle. I am buying it for space so I obviously made a point of checking.br
]{
just look at http://www.leftlanenews.com/bmws-clever-concept-co mpleted.html or http://www.worldcarfans.com/news.cfm/newsID/206050 5.005/country/gcf/bmw/clever-research-vehicle
Maneuverbility of bike with full body protection of a car. I'd rather have one of these.
"it's a Mercedes"
That's actually the biggest indictment against this car. A simple rule of thumb which has served me well is "never buy discount model from a premium vendor. It will be deliberately crippled in a dozen ways to give the impression that "cheap == crap and expensive == quality".
Get your cheap items from someone for who that is the main business. I.e. Need a cheap low mileage car to bustle around town? Talk to Toyota. The Corolla is very low cost but after driving a 1997 model for the 6 years (It was 4 years old when I bought it) I can safely say that the ROI has been incredibly high. The quality is as good as Toyota can produce, which in the modern car market is only a little lower than the regular Mercedes models.
For an example of this phenomenon a little closer to Slashdot readers hearts. Remember the 386 SX?
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Smart cars do indeed survive crashes well; the safety cell is very robust. But they have absolutely no crumple zones at all, so while the Smart should survive the impact without crushing its passengers, the passengers inside will be injured far more than in a larger car by the near instantaneous deceleration. It's inherent in small car design that you don't have as much room in which to control deceleration in a crash, but the Smart doesn't even have a bonnet (hood) in which you can put a crumple zone - your feet are just a few inches from the front of the car. Till they put airbags on the outside of cars this will be a problem for all similarly tiny cars.
Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
The Yugo was supposed to be a small, cheap car too. Not particularly fuel-efficient outside of having a small engine, but anyway...
The original "base price" advertised was something like $5,999 - but as I remember, the lowest-priced models you could get for a long time approached $9K. Dealers tended to load them up with extra features. It wasn't until they had been selling for a couple years that you could actually get a base model at base price--and by then, most people had heard the stories of shoddy construction and poor reliability, and were no longer interested.
At $14K and 40 mpg, the smart car's only advantage would seem to be being easy to park. I'd be willing to bet that the price would hit somewhere near $20K, and the fuel economy isn't particularly great.
I wish Mercedes the best of luck, but I suspect we'll be seeing another ego-driven product like the current hybrids--where a person spends $35K on a new car instead of $25K, so that they can get 50 mpg instead of 40 mpg and smugly claim to give a shit about the environment.
~
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/2008car1tablef.jsp? id=23518
;)
That's 21 combined, sucker! You're likely faring much worse if you brake right at the light and hit the gas at every start like the other BMW drivers I know
Yeah but... minivans have *more* space.
Nice try. Better luck next time.
Or are your children morbidly obese and you need the extra torque to get up a steep hill?
P.S. Cat Carriers + Cabin Area in car accident = Flying Cats of Death. Put the animals in the loose luggage--err cats in the trunk where they belong.
Actually, I was thinking of Celeron. Ironic name, given that Celer is Latin for fast, but it's the slowest processor around. It's pretty much the Pentia that didn't pass QA, sold in order to compete with the Duron.
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Limina.Log
Soviet Zaporozhets ZAZ-965 was produced in 1960-1963. If I calculate correctly (We Russians use metric system), it gave 42 miles per gallon according to factory specifications (5.5 litres of 76 octane fuel per 100 km).
Where are 45 years of progress?
Warrantees are never worth it, unless you are very unlikely. Insurance is never worth it, unless you are very unlucky, as well. However...
The burden of gas taxes disproportionately falls on the poor, not the rich people who are driving the large, luxury SUVs. Gas taxes are flat, $ per gallon taxes, which means, all things held constant, that a poorer person is paying more than a richer person. But, all things are not held constant, you say? Too true. The rich can afford new cars that get better gas mileage, whereas a poorer person must drive the car they have, which is likely to be an older, less efficient car. Connecting the dots, that means the rich are likely paying less per mile than the poor person. If the function of a gas tax is to pay for wear and tear done on the roads by vehicles, then it would seem logical to tax the travel, not the fuel. This doesn't even get into the whole debate over alternative fuels or electric vehicles, which would completely bypass any/all vehicle fuel taxes.
Speaking as someone who's not American, I think the car looks super cool and I want one... except I'm a student so I have no money :(
Nonsense. They *DO* own their houses. And their banks have a lien on their homes. But the bank certainly does not own their homes.
My name is on my deed(s). Not my bank's name.
Keep in mind GM pays no income taxes.
Need Mercedes parts ?
"Reliability-wise I would own a Toyota over a Mercedes any day of the year."
Eh. Ya know what? There's lots of 40 year old Mercedes on the roads. How many old toyotas do you see?
Need Mercedes parts ?
you're right, the old mini is much cooler.
Those of us who think they know everything annoy those of us who do.
"The rest of us have pity for them based on the very low reliability record of mercedes in general as shown in every years Consumer Reports car issue."
I have to think this is because the C ("Cheap") class is less expensive than a Toyota and people expect the same reliability. It isn't there, btu neither is the numb road feel and shitty ergonomics. I posit these people complain. But the guys that buy the high end stuff I doubt even read consumer reports and they keep buying them.
Having said that I know lots of people that love their C class cars.
Need Mercedes parts ?
"People in the know have been fleeing mercedes to go to Lexus for years"
Read the Mercedes usenet group to see how those same people find they aren't anywhere enarly
as happy with the performance and comfort but yes they are more reliable.
The secret to keeping a Mercedes happy is maintenance which you really can do yourself. There's
a reason there's lots of old ones around. I have a 83, a 72, a 70 and a 67.
Look at any Mercedes part then look at the equivalent japanese part. One is meant to be rebuilt
and sturdy as hell the other is the cheapest nastiest piece of pressed steel you've ever seen.
Even stupid things like switchs on a Mercedes are meant to be rebuilt. They're really meant to last. Every relay
on the 80s and up ones is way heavier than even the BMW counterpart and has silver contacts. When Mercedes
says "Engineered like no other car in the world" they really aren't exagerating.
Need Mercedes parts ?
but there are many great used cars out there. three years ago I bought a 96 Subaru impreza for 6000 that only had 60k miles on it. so far I had to fix a small oil leak and put new tires on it, total cost around $600.
These cars are out there, and they aren't that hard to find, and while mine gets somewhat shitty gas mileage, it would take a long time to make up the difference.
I used to have a cool sig, back when I cared
There are actually few cars as cheap to run as a 1980's diesel Mercedes. I got mine (s class) with 268K miles on it and in the diesel Mercedes community the joke is it's "barely broken in" and to an extent this is true. It now has about half a million miles on it and just keeps running.
Klatta klattta klatta.
I can't say the same for the vergassers. They are a bit more finicky and less surable.
Keep in mind though MB USA only imports the optioned-to-hell ones. The Euro ones are very plain on average - and are highly covered by the Mercedes freaks in North America for their simplicity.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Most importantly -- why would one want to drive around in something that small when it only gets 40 MPG!!!??! Geez, for something that small it should be getting 75-80, but noooo.
;^/ *plegh*
It's a big disappointment like when I first saw a "mini" -- such a small car and to what benefit? What is it about the 50MPG barrier that we can't exceed that these days -- even VW Rabbits from the 80's could get 40's, the diesels could get over 50. Now, 20 years later, no progress. I'd be suspicious or paranoid about a conspiracy, but that's just what they want me to be! Ha!
Even the Japanese light-vehicles from the 80's and through today get upwards of 40 MPG; 1.4 and 1.6L 4 bangers + light chassis = fuel economy. A 3-cylinder geo metro gets 60 MPG on the highway, GM is supposedly bringing that engine back as a 3-cylinder hybrid.
40mpg is what you'll get in the city. Most "average mpg" figures for the Smart are in the 60mpg range and Americans will probably get much more because they live on "highways".
No sig today...
Yes, the marketing droids tend to do that. When the Motorola Razr originally came out, I was really excited -- until I found out that my provider, Verizon, was going to carry a special SLIGHTLY LARGER version of the Razr. Yeah... thanks Verizon. I really want to be carrying around the special large version of the special small phone. What do you buy a man who loves his slightly dirtier apartment, slightly fuzzier television, slightly less tasty beer, and slightly stupider dog? A slightly larger Razr! Awesome! I'll carry it around in the pocket of my slightly uglier pants while I go for a cruise in my slightly larger Smart and look for slightly fatter women to make slightly more awkward passes at.
(But I'm still with Verizon because they put up a little bit of resistance to the government when the other companies didn't. Freedom, tiny phone, freedom, tiny phone. Not a hard choice. Still, fuck the marketing droids. I used to try to be cynical and think the worst of every fucking person on the planet, but I gave up when I realized that not only could I not match the cynicism and disdain of marketers, they actually come up with hard financial proof that their low opinion of humanity is accurate. That, I cannot do.)
>You realize that what you've just admitted is that you're ...
...
>1) putting most other drivers around you at risk, because of your high bumpers, poor braking and handling, and excess weight;
Only if I drive like a maniac, which is how hte little cars drive, weaving in and out of traffic. I ge tin a lane and just go.
>2) paying who knows how much extra in gas, and putting the resulting extra CO2 into the atmosphere;
You mean like "Global Warming" which is all BS anyway? I pay the extra in gas becaus eI need the extra space. You know how I save on gas? I movd close to work. It means that it takes less than 1 gallon of gas to make a ROUND TRIP to work.
>3) actually *sacrificing* space compared to rational people-moving vehicles (because of your high floor and long hood)
No, having the space I need when I move the Mother in laws wheel chair around town, or have enough space for me and my dive gear when traveling. Or putting several scouts in the car when traveling to a campout, and having enough space for their gear too. And the higher floor means I won't bottom out on those dirt roads.....
>... because you're insecure about how you look.
A car is a tool to get there from here. And the car the ad was about is the UGLIEST car.....
Luck had little to do with it.
Jettas, like most any car, has some great years and some bad ones.
For example, take the Jetta when they started production in Mexico, those vehicles were just awful, but they have gotten better since. Meanwhile the ones made in Germany have been consistently good. Of course, even then there are years and models to avoid... but the point is... you CAN avoid them.
Its not playing roulette.
All this information is readily available to the consumer and its relatively easy to avoid buying the bad years or models, and indeed its possible to choose to buy vehicles that have a proven excellent track record. Your odds of getting a lemon are better when you buy a new car - sure with a new car you've got a warranty... but that just amounts to prepaying the repairs by paying the premium for a new car.
I'd rather buy a used car with an excellent track record, maintenance records, and an inspection for X and make an educated gamble on not having to spend X again in repairs vs buying a new car for 2X and not having to worry about repair costs.
The 07 328i is EPA rated 18/28 w/a manual per the new MY 2008+ ratings and 20/30 per the MY 2007- ratings. See http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm. It seems unlikely you're getting in the high 30s (assuming US gallons and not Imperial gallons) unless you're hypermiling or you're basing it on a trip computer which maybe way inaccurate. (My former 02 Nissan Maxima's trip computer usually read 2-3 mpg too high, sometimes as much as 4 mpg high.)
The version we're going to get had better be a HUGE improvement over the version that was reviewed below.
f irst-look-2006-smart-fortwo-406/index.htm- test/budget-cars-12-06/smart-fortwo/1206_car_smart _fortwo.htm?view=Print. html
t -acceleration-4-07/overview/0704_best-worst-accele ration_ov.htm.
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/new-cars/
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/past-road
http://blogs.consumerreports.org/cars/smart/index
It was also the slowest in 0-60 times by FAR out of all the vehicles they tested at http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/best-wors
The cars you speak of are likely MUCH lighter and smaller than their current versions.
e ring-column-minicars-i-dont-see-no-stinking-minica rs.html/ 20070604/AUTO01/706040309/1148/AUTO010 3.htm
http://www.caranddriver.com/columns/11310/the-ste
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cert/mpg/fetrends/420s060
I'm actually impressed by some of the mileage improvements that automakers can still manage despite increasing size and weight. I used to have a 91 Toyota Camry V6: 2.5L 156 hp V6, curb weight of 3087 lbs and EPA rating of 18/24. I replaced it w/a 2002 Nissan Maxima: 255 hp 3.5L V6, curb weight of 3218 lbs, EPA rated 20/26. That's pretty impressive to me: a much larger car that weighs 131 lbs more, has 99 hp more yet is EPA rated 2 mpg better for city and highway.
Coming? Huh? There's a dealership in town (Portland Oregon) who's been selling them for almost five months, and another near Seattle who's been selling them even longer. In-fact, I purchased mine last November; the purchase was no different than any other car purchase - just walk in and buy the thing.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'm unsure after glancing thru your journal, but if you're in the UK, I hope you realize that Imperial gallons are larger than US gallons.
1 Imperial gallons = ~1.2 US gallons
46 miles per Imperial gallon is about 38.3 miles per US gallon.
It must be done.
So here it is..
*ahem*
I for one, welcome our new autotron overlords.
Thank you.
-- # man women
Mercedes has lifetime roadside assistance on all of their cars, regardless of how many owners it has had. If something goes boom, you can call them up, and they will tow your car (for free) to a dealer. So I guess you pay for it that way. :) If you have a weak battery and need a jump, call them up and they will send a guy out to jump you for free. I wonder if this will be extended to smart car owners. I've used the roadside assistance for jumpstarts on my 84 300SD a few times in the winter.
As far as service goes, Mercedes doesn't care how old of a car you show up with at a dealer. I brought my 73 450SL in for a recall repair (which they honored) and was provided with bottled water while I waited for paperwork, and then an E320 loaner car for a few days while the work was done. Nothing out of my pocket. Volvo provided me with a 2007 S60 2.5T AWD at no charge when I brought my beater 1988 740 in for a clutch job. I live in the middle of nowhere in the heartland of America, and finding a mechanic who is worth his salt AND willing to work on a European car can be difficult, so it is worth it to go to the dealer sometimes. I happily drove the S60 for a week, and when I went back to pick up my 740, an even older 240 was there. Volvo and Mercedes stand by their products forever, and support them forever.
"But it could easily "make or break" the overall "value" of your purchase if something major like a transmission fails 2 or 3 years into the vehicle ownership."
If a transmission in any car fails in 2 or 3 years, it either had more miles put on it than it was designed for, was abused, or was garbage to begin with. After 19 years and 174900 miles, the factory original clutch was replaced in my Volvo 744. After 32 years and 156000 miles, the original transmission in my 450SL was replaced. The odo died on my 300SD at 190000 miles two years ago, but I'm still happily running on the original transmission. My brother's 1992 Volvo 745 Turbo has 225000 miles on the original transmission, and it runs just like the day it was new. If a transmission ever failed in 2 or 3 years on a car that I had, I would raise hell over it.
"...the assurance that my new car doesn't have some worn out part just waiting to fail and greatly inconvenience me when I need my car the most..."
That's why engineers design things called "failure modes." The engineers can come up with a mode in which a part will fail and give you minimal problems. Part of component failure mode design in automotive engineering is developing warnings of impending failure. We commonly have brake pad wear sensors to alert you to change the brake pads so you can stop, exhaust manifold temperature sensors and boost pressure sensors to alert you to a problem with a turbocharger before the pistons melt, knock sensors to indicate that there is an ignition or fuel issue before you cause damage to the engine, coolant temperature sensors so you can be warned that the engine is not being cooled and you can shut it down before it blows, wobbling from a ball joint that is worn and needs replacement so a wheel doesn't shear off, creaking and bouncing from suspension that is worn and needs replacement so the car doesn't bounce around everywhere, vibration from a worn bearing that could cause a wheel to shear off, the list goes on. In a correctly engineered car, there are very few items that can break down that couldn't give you ample warning that something was wrong beforehand.
In my opinion, its environmentally unethical to continually purchase new cars when hundreds of thousands are on the road that work just fine or only require simple maintenance. Cars are lasting longer now in the US than they did 20 years ago (notice the change from 100k mile odometers to 1M mile odometers) and are easier to diagnose problems on now thanks to the myriad sensors onboard. My daily driver is a 2002 Volvo V70, that I bought used, but you can't tell it isn't brand new. I paid less than half what it cost new, and much less than half of what a new V70 costs. The best part is there are only minor differences between the 2002 and a new one. So why buy the new one?
On what roads? Romania?
Take a look here:
http://www.topgear.com/content/carsurvey/2006/
and
http://www.reliabilityindex.co.uk/
See how Mercedes fares versus Toyota.
Mercedes is a long way from what it used to be.
Trolls are like broken clocks. They show the truth two times a day. The rest of the day they talk nonsense.
So smaller vehicles are the answer......guess we need semis and trains the size of pickup trucks.....it could happen.
What do you mean could? Actually look at the dimensions of a large pickup or SUV when it is stopped beside a semi or a dump truck. There are an ever increasing number of passenger(*) vehicles that have no fleet mileage requirements because they fall in the same weight category as moving vans. The funny part is that most of those "Heavy Duty" pickups are all pecs and no package. Some are so heavy that they can barely carry four adults without overloading the suspension (and, I repeat, these are trucks branded "Heavy Duty"). All pecs and no package.
So go for the Colt, pretty much the same car, 45 MPG+
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_Colt
I think it should be known that tractor trailor vehicles may have much higher requirements for them as far as licensing, driving, and standards. But at the same time they have maybe about 1/4 of the saftey features that a modern car does. If a truck driver gets into an serious accident. He's only got about a 20 percent chance of living. Trucks are made to haul as much crap as they can, while still being under the 80k weight limit.
Viken K
"Secondly it's a Mercedes"
The last generation was -- and I'll do you one better, it was a MID-ENGINE Mercedes -- but this current is made in large part by Mitsubishi.
Hilary Rosen's speech was about her love of money and her desire to roll around naked in a pile of money.
... wohnt. Es war ironisch.
Wie die Volksrepublik von Yorkshire oder Volksrepublik von Falkirk.
Entschuldigen Sie bitte.
Es tut mir leid.
Diese kurzen deutschen Sätze sind auch ironisch.
Ein bisschen wie Yoda.
Wenn jedermann mit mir sprechen brauche. Ich bin in meinem zimmer.
Posts, MyBio or Sig, may contain satire, sarcasm, bolded nouns be sardonic or even witty & be Church of SD
I guess it can work...I just personally wouldn't be seen dead in it :/
They are probably not people with a good grasp of physics. Such people think mass = safety, where people with a better grasp of physics understand that resilience = safety. The Smart FourTwo is very light, with a strong, resilient frame. An SUV hitting a wall is like a billiard ball hitting a wall, while the FourTwo will behave much more like a ping-pong ball when hitting the same wall.
"How perfectly Goddamn delightful it all is, to be sure" Charles Crumb
Yeah - really difficult to get americans to give up their http://fawny.org/blog/images/Bulgemobiles_Fire.jpg '58 Bulgemobiles, or the later day equivalent! :-)
.
(David Bowman, EVA near HUGE Monolithic Win-PC in orbit around Jupiter) "My God - its full of Malware!"
I tend to talk to Taxi drivers about their odometers.... Generally whenever there is an impressive amount on the odometer, it is not all original drive train.
I have a Toyota Corolla Verso, a seven-seater compact MPV which quite happily fits me, my wife and our four children. I don't know which children's seat you've got installed in your car, but we've got a Jané Indy Plus for our youngest, and it can hardly be considered small. It takes up one seat.
The only thing I can imagine is that you've got some kind of enormous cages for you cats. Seriously. My car can fit five adults and two children, and it's not much bigger than a hatchback. I find it incomprehensible that you can possibly require a SUV for your small family. It sounds to me as if you'd be much better served with an MPV or a compact MPV, or maybe an estate car. They all have loads of space, and your small child will find it much easier to climb in and out of.
I'm not sure how you guys managed to make your roads so dangerous.... I believe that in many places you can ride a bicycle on the road, and the smart car should be safer. I don't like the look of them, but I've stopped buying cars for looks.
could it be that the only large sedans available in the UK?
No, they're pretty much average (maybe a little to the small side), but they're cheap and reliable, and easy to get parts for
Minicabs and black cabs are not the same thing. Black cabs have more expensive licencing which allow them to be hailed in the street. Minicabs may only be "private hire" cars, which you phone up and book. The cars of choice for this in Glasgow are the Skoda Octavia, Lexus or Toyota, or Citroën Xantia, mainly because they're all large, cheap to buy and have a nice reliable fuel-efficient diesel up the pointy end.
At least they seemed to have learned from the launch here in Germany. The car was introduced as fun-car for young people, the campaign totally flopped and sales stayed far behind expectations. Nowadays this car seems to be accepted as useful transportation device for a 40+ target group, with a little air of cult. It's a good car for granny: easy to drive, low on consumption and cheap insurance. And some funny advantages like special half-size parking in some cities (e.g. Basel) or legally putting the car at the right angle to the sidewalk to save space. So launching a campaign directed to the usage of it seems the perfectly right way to me. But indeed: considering the size, the mileage is poor and it is a bit too expensive.
I'm not the original OP, but I'll reply:
You must have a mental fixation on the older, large SUVs. Most I see on the road are the newer, mini-SUVs, like mine. The bumpers are not high, it brakes and handles quite well, and it's not all that heavy. But more to the point, go fuck yourself, wuss.
I'll worry about how much I pay in gas. Thanks for your concern but it's none of your fucking business. And the green biomass of the planet needs the CO2. "Sequester CO2, kill a rain forest."
The high seat allows me to slide directly in and out instead of having to lower myself in and then raise myself to get out. I also have a sedan of the same brand but it's too hard on my arthritic knees to get into and out of it. My hood is not very long. I must not be driving the kind of SUV you have in mind, but that's because you're a moron.
Wahl, sonny, one of the things I'm not at my age is insecure. I'm bald and I don't give a shit. I have trouble finding clothes that fit and I don't give a shit how they look. I have to wear sneaks because of my diabetic feet, but I don't give a shit what that looks like. Do I like the looks of my SUV? Yes. It's attractive. It looks a whole lot nicer than my sedan. My pair of 20" 1600x1200 LCD flat panels look a lot better than my older 21" HItachi 1600x1200 CRTs. It's an esthetic thing, not an insecurity thing, moron.
In comparison, that Smartcar looks like a pre-crashed piece of shit. To those of you who like it, I say you've got some serious life issues. I hope you and your junk toy cars are happy with each other. Just don't get in front of my SUV, hehehe.
Just shows how backwards US trucks are. In the EU, they've a plethora of safety features required as standard. ABS on the trailers has been mandatory for a decade and a half and ABS on the trailers is now being replaced by EBS where every single wheel can be braked to a different level. Also EU lorries have been moving from drum to disc brakes for quite some time too. Add to that the improvements in rear/side visibility.
Conor "You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart
Am I the only person who has seen the "H3 - CRUSH EVERYTHING!!! billboards? If so, mister parent poster, you shall shit yourself forthwith.
Put a towel down.
Click link.
Enjoy.
Please stop stalking me, bro.
your wife needs to take some xanax and chill. and then stop being so fucking shallow. and given the fact that you married her, you need to be a real man and tell her what to do more often. not trying to be mean. but apparently, you're rich, so you can take it.
buy smaller cars. really.
If it passed the Swedish Elk Test then it probably won't roll over as easily as we think
That was a Coupe Elk. The SUV Elk chewed though a Smart like it was made of tinfoil.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
And here you bring up the oldest argument in the book, "it hurts the poor." Simply put, those poor people will be a whole lot worse off when global warming changes our climate even more, especially because they are poor. Furthermore, SUVs are generally not luxury vehicles and it doesn't matter whether the person driving it is rich or poor: They need to pay for their gas addiction. Someone is going to have to pay and change their lifestyle, because making excuses certainly isn't going to stop global warming.
We managed to make them so dangerous by exempting vehicles build on truck frames (ie. SUVs) from CALEA standards. This killed off the station wagon and brought the SUV in as a replacement, so now we have tons of people driving around huge, high vehicles that are a danger to everyone where before they were driving huge, low vehicles that weren't nearly as big a problem.
Good cat carriers can be belted in, and aren't likely to come loose or open in an accident.
You do realize that there's more than one model of child safety seat available, right? And that some of them don't require more than one seat of space?
I drive a Mazda 3 (hatchback, so it's surprisingly effective when hauling things from Costco or Ikea), and had two crated small dogs, myself, my wife and one child seated comfortably during a road trip to Oklahoma.
Great, I can't wait until people start parking on the sidewalks like they do in Europe.
> But more to the point, go fuck yourself, wuss.
Here's a tip: if you want to make a point, don't invalidate yourself by coming off as a blithering idiot.
> Thanks for your concern but it's none of your fucking business.
Actually, when supply and demand is of concern, it very well is.
> And the green biomass of the planet needs the CO2.
Again, I shall have to assume this is a joke.
> that's because you're a moron.
Insulting people because they have different point of view is generely a bad tactic, bad manners, and unintelligent.
> one of the things I'm not at my age is insecure.
Really, Anonymous Coward?
> It's an esthetic thing, not an insecurity thing, moron.
Do you even know what you are talking about? You're becoming increasingly incoherent in this paragraph.
> In comparison, that Smartcar looks like a pre-crashed piece of shit.
> To those of you who like it, I say you've got some serious life issues.
> I hope you and your junk toy cars are happy with each other.
> Just don't get in front of my SUV, hehehe.
And now you've just dismissed everything you might have tried to say. You are a troll, an idiot, and an embarrasment. Please go away.
Adventure, Romance, MAD SCIENCE!
He does realize. Fully. But he bought it anyway. And he'll buy another.
Humans are well-practiced in the skill of blanking out when mental contents conflict. And so I can only conclude that the optimal- ooooooooooh look pretty car!!
FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
Let me get this straight...you think runaway global climate change is going to be stopped by a fucking gas tax?
Really?
gameDB
In Chicago, I see a few of them regularly driving around, mostly on 290/Congress and LSD.
If patriotism is racist, is racism patriotic?
While I agree that the Oil Titans and the Auto Executives are working together to screw working people (I recently aquired a 13 year old Honda that averages 45mpg, and higher on the freeway), Ford is not a good example of how to run an automobile company.
This 'Smart' car should get at least 50mpg. They've probably just geared it for performance, and not fuel economy. Another way to make sure no one can hide from the oil companies' money vacuum.
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
Yup, tons of them in Vancouver too. Most people are just ignorant when it comes to crash safety, insisting that small cars are unsafe. Even though all cars, big or small, go through the same crash tests. It's more unsafe to be yapping on your cell phone, but that doesn't seem to bother them.
That being said, I don't think the Smart will sell well in the US (I've worked there many years and I've actually driven a Smart car):
- Smart is a city car. US is built around highways. Yeah, it could go on the highways, but it isn't as good as other small cars on the highway.
- No space! It is very comfortable and big for 2 people, but that's about it. Pitted against a similarly priced Yaris, Fit or Versa and it's a loser. The fit & finish on the Fit are MUCH better to boot.
- Can fit in small parking spaces? Sure, but it's not an issue in USA except in a few of the big cities (NY, LA...) Every other place has got big expanses of parking space.
- That diesel engine is LOUD. It sounds like big delivery truck is sitting right behind you.
- The transmission is shit. There's neck snapping lurches with every shift!
Great idea, but sorry to see it won't fly.
Some friends of mine already bought more than a month ago. I'm in Phoenix,` AZ.
It's not like US roads are Mad Max yet. But driving a tiny car like this is dangerous because:
A) You will get zero respect from other drivers, making lane changing a bit unnerving.
B) An SUV's bumper will come up just about to your head.
C) Less visible to other drivers in "normal" sized cars or semitrucks.
And, yes, there are bicyclists all over the place. And it is VERY dangerous to be on the roads. In my state there are even attorneys dedicated to representing people on bicyclists who get into accidents.
and not commercially owned either, I drove past a couple in one yesterday. The car took up half of a regular lane.
I'm obviously painting with a very broad brush here -- but as this should demonstrate, our local breakdowns are different from yours. (Also, BMW USA doesn't sell anything new I can comfortably afford while paying down my house quickly; they don't aim at the lower end of the market here at all).
Although, I agree with you that late 80s and early 90s cars got excellent mileage. And there's a reason why. Those old Japanese cars were putting out 90hp. People today are obsessed with horsepower. They're barely skilled enough to drive what they currently own but they're always looking for more power. So you've got 2 liter engines putting out 200+ HP and V6s approaching 300hp. A US-based economy car nowadays automatically starts at 140hp. It's insane.
It's one of the reason for the popularity of hybrids. You get the small displacement engine, but the electric motor prevents the driver from feeling the small, under-powered engine. Well, and the second reason is as a status symbol. And that's why the Prius sells so well but other hybrids have struggled.
You can see the difference between the US and European market in performance figures. A car that does 0-60 in 6 to 7 seconds in Europe is considered very fast. In the US that's nothing where you've got relatively inexpensive cars getting to 60 in the low 5's.
For many Americans horsepower is somehow synonymous with overall performance. I've encountered people who are convinced an over-sized SUV performs just as well as a dedicated sports car. The only basis for this rational is that the large displacement engine provides a stronger shove due to torque compared to the economy car they used to drive.
By and large Americans are very ignorant drivers. A large percentage of drivers deserve to have their licenses revoked. The testing process should be significantly more demanding. Testing should be performed on enclosed courses where drivers are forced to perform a series of tasks. Although, I think driving on actual roads is a useful part of the testing process. I also think prospective drivers should be educated and test on basic technical details, brakes, wheels, identifying basic engine components, inspections, etc.
If you can't perform basic inspections and maintenance on your own car you shouldn't be driving. Look at a simple responsibility like keeping tires properly inflated. Almost every day I see cars with under-inflated tires. Or even ensuring that all signals and lights are functioning properly. Many drivers seem to be completely oblivious to what their own cars are doing.
Government inspections should also be more rigorous because it's ridiculous the mess some people are driving around in. That's yet another hazard the government does little about. My thinking is, if you can't keep the car in proper driving condition then you shouldn't driving. Driving is a privilege not a right. Of course, the US also suffers from a lack of a good public transportation system in many parts of the country.
On the subject of the smart car, it's a neat car but I wouldn't feel particularly safe in one despite innovative safety features. Not too long ago I happened to see a clip of some show where they crashed a smart car into a jersey barrier at 70mph. This was followed by another test with an older economy car crashing into the same type of barrier at the same speed. The smart car did definitely came out better, but not by much. My impression was that the hosts of this show glossed over the results because the smart car didn't fare as well as they had hoped. It was clear that the engine and dashboard was pushed into the driver's compartment. The lower half of the driver's body would have been destroyed.
It comes down to simple physics. It's an exceedingly small car and there's isn't much to crush before parts start intruding into the passenger compartment. What they've done with such a small car is indeed impressive. But many of the safety features in that car are present in countless other cars both large and small. Maybe the difference in Europe is more pronounced given that safety standards there aren't quite as stringent in the US.
Incidentally, from my personal experience, males are much more opposed to the car than females are.
That's because they're fucking ugly. Then there's the 0 to 100 KM/h in 19.8 seconds (supposedly reduced to 12 seconds in the '08 models).
Fortunately, we don't have many here in Windsor. I haven't had the pleasure of being stuck behind one trying to merge onto the freeway - I imagine it might be doing 60 by the time it reaches the end of the on-ramp, and it's time to merge with 100 KM/h traffic.
It seems that for all the discussion about diesel here people have failed to recognize something of particular importance here. The US version of the Smart Car will NOT be diesel. That means that while I would have been in line on that $99 reservation list, I will be taking a pass. Here in my city I can buy Bio diesel easily in a number of locations and the Smart Car would have been perfect. Now I'll be going out and buying an older Mercedes to convert to Bio diesel. Sad that they wouldn't even offer it as In option but I suspect that there's some regulatory reason why we can't get it in diesel.
And that's the truth of it. There aren't many stupider things to do than rent longterm. I should know, I've rented for the last 8 years or so. I have probably paid over 30 000€ of rent and I have nothing to show for that money. By now I could have paid off about a third of the the loan.
I used to use as an excuse the chance that I might lose my job so I need to be able move to a cheaper apartment. But that doesn't really work. If I can't afford to pay the rent on my current apartment, then I most likely can't afford the expenses of moving. If I owned my apartment I could just rent my bedroom to some student for couple hundred. Since I rent I don't have that option.
If you can't afford to own your own apartment then live with your parents or under the bridges. Renting just isn't worth it.
Begging for modpoints since '03
No kidding. I've seen those cars in movies and every time I see them, I laugh. For something that small (publicity claims to "large interior" not withstanding), I'd want a HECK of a lot more than 40mpg. And I'd want it for a lot less than $14,000--why in the world does it cost so much?
Personally, and I say this as a person who is not normally all that risk-averse, I've been interested in getting a motorcycle for a while, but I'm just not sure that I trust the drivers around me enough to want to ride one in the traffic where I live (DC Metro area).
I bought my first motorcycle 27 years ago. My current bike I bought new in 2003, and it has less than 500 miles on it because I just got tired of being tailgated by Explorers. On one occasion, I had a guy driving 10 feet behind me at 55, then passed me straddling the center line, forcing me to move toward the shoulder, then slammed on his brakes in front of me. I used to ride to relax, but I started to feel that I needed to carry a gun to ride so I haven't ridden in 2 years. Obviously I wasn't finding it very relaxing. I'll probably go look at a Cabrio when they are available. Too bad they won't be offered with a diesel.
I know several people who have 1st generation Smarts and they love them. The 1st gen are popular with RVers because they can be loaded sideways (less than 102" long) on the truck pulling their 5th wheel.
It is amazing what you can accomplish if you do not care who gets the credit. -- Harry Truman
I will agree that older Mercedes cars are fantastically reliable, having had a 1983 230E with 650,000 KM on it when it was given up (I bought it at 490,000 KM). Original engine and transmission. It's not strange, they're built like tanks with old and trusted technology. Simple to fix. But they've skimped in later years and are not as well-built as they used to be.
I'd take a Toyota or Mazda over a Mercedes any day.
Wrong. The people who drive them think they're cool, but everyone else thinks they're shit.
Oooo, 40 MPG. Crash protection.
;-)
Whoopee.
My Volkawagen Jetta TDI gets 50 MPG on the highway, and has 5-star crash rating from the NHSB or whatever the acronym is. It cost $20,000 after a trade in, which is more than the described car. But, it gets 50 on the highway, is plenty safe, and, in addition to beating most hybrids in terms of mileage (and cost), I use biodiesel. That's tough to beat. A hybrid diesel... ooouh, that could be hot.
I should read the article before dismissing the "smart" car, but still, I'm not inclined to do it. (Partially because my girlfriend is hovering over me here at the Apple Store.
-- haaz.
forthly it's already available. There are 4 of them in my local small town. Coming to the US in 2008???
They are seen in Chicago, New York and Detroit, most people in those cities are getting used to them.
So how is it they are coming to the US in 2008?
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Most people parrot made up crap that other people spew. I own a Pontiac Fiero. the a car that got a 5 star crash rating. It still has a crash rating as high as the best volvos out there. People simply like to talk down about a car that is not what they drive or ends up look far better than theirs. My 86 GT turns heads and get's comments all the time as "is that a Ferrari?" or "Is that a 2008?" etc... They flip out when they learn it's a 1986 classic car (with a nice huge vette engine shoehorned in) and ask why they dont make cool looking cars anymore.
I also think the Smart is a great car and Want to get one as soon as the price comes down to sanity land. A local dealer sells them for $24,000.00 here in Michigan.
Which make me confused to the statement that they are coming in 2008.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Stickerboy is right. Look up the size and curb weights of your 91 Civic vs. a current one. The articles below cover the topic of bloat.
e ring-column-minicars-i-dont-see-no-stinking-minica rs.html/ 20070604/AUTO01/706040309/1148/AUTO01
http://www.caranddriver.com/columns/11310/the-ste
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=
That's total BS to claim that you're CLEANING the environment by driving any car. I guess you've never bothered to look up actual emissions nor the meanings of air pollution scores. Per http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm, the 07 Mercedes E320 Bluetec emits 8.1 tons/year of greenhouse gases. It's greater than 0 or negative. FWIW, the Prius is estimated to emit 4 tons/year.
- diesel-fails-to-meet-50-state-emissions-requiremen t/ mentions it failed to meet Tier 2 Bin 5. You can lookup the meaning of that on page 1 of http://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/detailedchart.pdf vs. the PZEV (9.5 score that CARB spec Priuses get) on page 3. You'll see that for Tier 2 Bin 5, the allowed emission limits for all pollutants except one are MANY times higher than that of a PZEV car. Again, both of these are non-zero values.
The air pollution score for the Merc for some reason is unavailable, but http://www.trucks.autoblog.com/2006/08/29/bluetec
Hence blocking in both the cars you parked between causing them to ram in to your doors and wreck you little vehicle.
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
Saw a fortwo driving around the Dallas Farmer's Market yesterday. It has Texas plates, so it wasn't like they just drove it across the pond or anything.
It's crazy that the parent has been modded from 4 to 5 in the last few hours. His post is inaccurate BS and should be modded down.
I'm sorry, but since when is poor equal to stupid?
It is indeed true that old cars with horrible mileage will fall to the poor. However, *any* measure across the board you take will impact the wealthy less, as they can afford it, and b) can effectively use money to quickly take advantage of the 'sweet spots' in a system.
Any measure across the board changes the economics of driving. Poor people aren't stupid. If anything, poor people know how to manage money quite well, and will adapt to the change.
Carpooling is a decent cost-saver... if you're willing to combine resources for the 40-mile travel to and from work.
Getting a job nearby (or towards work instead of suburbia-behind-faraway) instantly gives benefits.
The problem is that compared to 'the rest' of the world, the US has hugely inflated prices on oil. Europeans pay up to 300%, I think (not sure, I haven't checked), and they manage perfectly well. They live closer to work, use public transportation, *and* buy high-mileage cars (or go by foot... or bikes... or even scooters, which really get amazing mileage... something like 100 mpg? not sure... and be quicker at work because a traffic jam is a 'slowdown', not a halt)
Give poor people some credit.
I'm not saying the tax should be big and immediate. But say that we'll increase tax by 3% for the upcoming 10 years.
Because this smells a bit of naysaying. I understand your point, and, given the current mistrust in the current administration, there is some validity in thinking they are stupid enough to suddenly drop in a flat tax which doubles the cost of oil ("It's for our troops in Afghanistan. Oh no. Irak. Eh..then it should be temporary. Where do we have troops again? Oh hmmm. For our troops fighting terrorists! then?"), even they can work it out slowly but surely...
$14,000, two passengers, up to 12ft^3 cargo space ( with zero reward visibility).
I have a 2004 VW Golf TDI that I paid $17,000 for. It seats 4 and has ~18ft^3 cargo space and oh... I average 44MPG in it. I also run it on soybean oil so I have almost zero net pollution.
It's a shame that VW discontinued this configuration (small hatchback with diesel engine). Its even more of a shame that they probably had to do it for lack of demand from the American consumer.
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
Soccer Mom, go suck an exhaust pipe.
The sole reason for SUVs is that the design allows Detroit to build fucking big cars while bypassing the fleet mpg goals set by the Feds. It costs less to convince millions of brain dead Soccer Moms and Dads that they need to buy these status symbols than it would cost to engineer a decently efficient and safe car. Or more to the point perhaps, Detroit thinks it is better to pay the big bucks to Marketing and Lobbying types than to R&D and QA.
The limiting factor on safety is always the training of the operator. If you want safe streets, demand license tests that assure the driver has safe habits, and yank the licenses of anyone who is seen doing anything stupidly dangerous.
It seems like you're just hand waving. Combustion consumes oxygen and ends up producing carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrous oxides, particulate matter, etc. You can read about what these do at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/invntory/overview/pollutan ts/index.htm.
Vehicles produce non-zero amounts of the above. The Bluetec Mercedes E320 produces far higher levels of the above than many passenger cars and also wasn't clean enough to be sold in California and the other CARB states. So, you're telling me this dirty car is cleaning the air?
However, per http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm, using the new MY 2008+ ratings, the Corolla you speak of is EPA rated 28/37, 31 combined vs. 48/45, 46 combined. That's a deficit of about ~21% for highway and 48% combined. Not that close in my book.
Especially seeing as you can total one at as little as 9mph. Or rather, some inattentive moron trying to control their hyperactive kids, fiddling with the radio or talking on their cellphone can. The "smart" Roadster is totaled in a 9mph rear-ender. I've seen the crash-test footage.
Not that I'd buy an ordinary smart either. It's got no crumple zones. Most other cars have these for a reason.
Where do you get the idea that running on soybean oil (or biodiesel) in general produces "zero net pollution"? Running on that still produces pollution and even the guys at http://www.biodiesel.org/pdf_files/fuelfactsheets/ emissions.pdf acknowledge there's still pollution, just a reduction compared w/regular diesel in most cases.
d =9561. Unfortunately the FAQ that went into more detail on vw.com is gone now.
VW's also have terrible long term reliability and your warranty is only valid if you run on no more than 5% biodiesel (B5). See http://media.vw.com/article_display.cfm?article_i
78 miles per gallon in twelve-finger units)
Twelve-knuckle units... the ancient Egyptians figured this out. They knew something about prime factors.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
There is at least one dealership in the Portland area, been here for at least a year. Am I missing something?
Help him out. The myth is reviewed at snopes.com [snopes.com]. Maybe his dad reads snopes just for stories to unload on him.
Nice. Calvin's dad would.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
"SUV owners would revolt and vote. Most rich white voters who are male and own such vehicles vote more than any other group which is why the republicans have been winning so many elections. You do not want to piss them off."
Wow, both class and ethnic bias. I wonder if you make the same case about poor black people voting democratic, with the poverty pimps like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
. The only rational reason not to get one is that you don't know how to drive a stick
How are you supposed to text somebody if you're steering and shifting?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
This is accounted for by the design of the safety cage, which is hardened and designed to utilize the crumple zone of the OTHER car for deceleration. If the other car crumples, you decelerate.
(39MPG, Highway)
I think the smart looks nice, but I have more faith in the Toyota brand.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Ok, all your story says is that the guy in the smaller car loses in an accident. Therefor, as a car buyer, the safest new vehicle for ME to buy is an SUV. Your argument does not refute that point.
Truth be told, though, the ultimate safest vehicle design might well be an early 70's American luxury sedan, albiet one updated with better seatbelts and airbags. They used a stronger grade of steel than is used in today's cars, along with body on frame construction, making these cars very strong. However, both the stronger steel and body on frame were jettisoned to save weight during the dash to greater fuel efficiency, proving, yet again, that lighter cars are not as safe.
They just aren't.
All you really can say is that if everyone drove lighter cars, the roads might be safer, but that is not the same as saying the smaller car is actually safer.
Truth please!
This is my sig.
I believe the US is getting a slightly longer wheel base version that the rest of us??
:P
I'd get one except as a giging musician (Ampeg 8x10 Fridge? 3/4 Double Bass? na) and part time photographer (camera bags, tripods, light stands, flashpacks? na) it is sadly too small for my current needs... so I'll stick to the Honda Jazz (Fit? in US) for now
Anyway once you have one (and if you don't actually give a damn about fuel economy) and a few grand to play with whack in a Suzuki GSX1300R (Hyabusa) engine, call it a Smazuki and scare the living daylights out of any stock, so called, sports car
The sports models quite nice too - love to see one of those tricked out as a Smarzuki
Unfortunately, the FAQ the vw.com used to have up regarding biodiesel and B5 is gone. Essentially it said, for the purposes of the engine and emissions warranty (IIRC), you may not use any more than 5% biodiesel from approved sources and that it must meet petroleum industry standards. Fuel where the source is unknown doesn't qualify.
s -gain-major-ground-in-consumer-reports/ and http://www.jdpower.com/corporate/news/releases/pre ssrelease.asp?ID=2006133 for example.
VW reliability is far below average and many of their vehicles are the least reliable in their classes.
See http://www.autoblog.com/2006/11/10/domestic-model
Yep, http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID= /20050426/FREE/504260702&SearchID=73230581548062 has mentions "Smart, which has never been profitable and which DaimlerChrysler considered closing, will undergo a turnaround strategy that will cost $1.56 billion. Schrempp now promises the brand will break even in 2007, with a lineup reduced to the two-seat ForTwo and the larger ForFour model..."
But why don't you think of the (MY) children!
The 1st gen diesel model gets about 70mpg...
The difference between spam and poop is that you don't have to dig through septic tanks looking for real food. -- Me
Please educate me as to why Americans can't drive SUVs with "win-win"* diesel engines?
{*} "Win-win" in the sense that you could drastically reduce fuel consumption (maybe 60-70%) AND get an engine which is far more suited to your SUVs (plenty of low-rev torque for moving heavy objects).
No sig today...
This is made a lot harder if you have only ever driven cars before, and is the main reason for the increasing death rate here in the UK among "born again bikers" over forty, most of whom have generally been driving a car for 20 years and have probably not even been on a pushbike for the same length of time.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
well, you don't have to be "very" unlucky for insurance to pay off, just slightly less lucky than average. But, that's a fair point, touche ;)
These are actually fairly common in Canada now... in a city of about 50k I know there are at least a dozen or two - they kind of stand out, haha...
They're good, functional, ugly ugly cars. I just don't see why we can't get some proper kei cars here like the ones sold by Japanoid.com (not a plug, never dealt with 'em.) They look ok, work well, and you can even get pretty sporty models too. I think the biggest barrier to the Smart car is that it looks really weird - like some kind of go-kart pod. Still, if I got one for free, I'd drive it because like I said, it's still a pretty good car...
Re: $24,000 this year. Those are grey-market cars, being brought in by a third-party importer. The Smarts on sale next year will be legitimately designed for the US market.
- R
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s
The video is stunning (in a good way). This car was put together with a lot of things in mind, size of drivers/passengers and crashes included.
Regards,
You're *always* using someone else's money to buy large items, unless you're really financially well off. So what? Even our own government does things this way, all the time.
... so I have no worries. But I also accept the fact that typically, a vehicle purchase is the second-largest purchase a person makes, next to their home. So assuming I should be able to buy it outright vs. taking out a loan seems far-fetched.
It's nice to make "pie in the sky" statements like "Don't buy a car unless you can pay for it in full, up-front!" - but that would leave most of us driving unreliable, ugly pieces of junk, even as we try to use them to get to a decent paying job each day.
I didn't buy a car I couldn't afford to make the monthly payments on
Furthermore, I don't quite see the "value" in paying out considerable amounts of money (even gas, oil changes and tires add up to a considerable investment in operating your vehicle over time) on a car or truck you're not really happy to be driving around? If you can find a "nearly new" vehicle somebody will sell you at a good price, and it's really a vehicle you wanted in the first place - great! But that doesn't always happen....
The problem comes in when people buy more than they can afford to make the payments on comfortably, under a false assumption that it will "all work out ok" just because someone is willing to give them a loan for that amount....
How retarded is it that we americans get stuck with something that barely gets 40. My Jetta gets 49-50MPG every tank, wtf do I want the tiniest car ever conceived that gets *worse* gas mileage than what is already available.
...is Smart car tipping, the newest sport to hit Canadian streets. It only takes two guys of average strength. The challenge is to try to put the car on its side with the least possible rocking motion. While I have no doubt that this craze will catch on with Americans too, we Canadians have four years' more experience (just in case you have any visions of starting an international Smart Car Tipping League). The rest of you can supply the cars.
"I'm a marketing manager who lives in the suburbs and commutes to work on the highway. I live alone, so of course I needed a car that can seat 12 and is equipped to drive across arctic tundra. It just makes me feel better."
"The new Maibatsu Monstrosity -- Mine's Bigger!(TM)"
"Phil and I just had another kid. So of course we need a bigger SUV. Being a mom is hard, with soccer, football and lacrosse practice, so we bought the new Maibatsu Monstrosity. It's so big, we lost little Joey in the back and couldn't find him for an hour! When I'm rushing to the mall or talking on my cell phone, I know me and my family are safe. The Maibatsu Monstrosity has 4-wheel drive and in amphibious mode it can cross rivers! So far I've only hit a few puddles, but it's good to know it's there. With the time I save taking shortcuts through the strip-mall parking lot I can focus on the important things, like gazing longingly at the pool boy or buying more exercise equipment off the TV. So what if it gets 3 miles to the gallon? I'm a mom, not a conservationist!"
"The new Maibatsu Monstrosity -- Mine's Bigger!(TM)"
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
It's entirely a matter of comfort. The seating in cars is configured all wrong. Most other vehicles are configured like trucks and it's much more natural. I believe some smart engineering could fix the problem the car faces, but I'm not sure there is enough incentive for the auto manufacturers to do so.
Per http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorCompareSi deBySidePopUp.jsp?column=1&id=7733, the most efficient 91 Tercel (in terms of highway mpg) was one w/a 4 speed manual, rated at 33/37. It had a curb weight of ~1950 to 2050 lbs. from looking at http://www.edmunds.com/used/1991/toyota/tercel/883 0/specs.html and autos.msn.com along w/a whopping 82 hp.
s _full_specs.asp?ModelName=Civic+Sedan&Category=4) and has 140 (!) hp.
In comparison, a 2007 Honda Civic is EPA rated 30/40 w/auto, weighs 2690 to 2807 lbs (depending on trim per http://automobiles.honda.com/models/specification