Archives

Ok, before the flames start flying, there is no hateration here. I love the idea of the Smart Car.

Every day, I'd drive to work in my Jeep Cherokee, and think how wasteful it is to haul one person around in a 4000lb vehicle.

So, I bought a motorcycle, and every time I stop off at the store to pick up a few things on the way home from work, I think about how much grief it is to ride a bike as daily transportation (especially when it rains!)

A small, two-seater with room for a little bit of cargo is the perfect compromise.

But, with a car that small, with a sub-1 litre engine, even the 55 mpg some hypermilers appear to be getting out of it is just unacceptable, especially when you're required to run premium fuel in it. My 1990 CRX HF got 45 mpg, and I'd never heard of hypermiling. I treated the throttle like an on/off switch, either idle or flat out, and revved it till the lifters floated in every gear. It's 1.5 litre engine was faster than a Smart Car, it held more cargo, and I could frequently stuff an unconscious fraternity brother in the rear area, allowing it to carry three drunks comfortably. It just amazes me that 18 years of technological development hasn't improved on that little CRX.

When you look at going green, there are two main concerns; saving resources, and saving money. The Smart Car clearly saves resources, burning less of a non-renewable resource, gasoline, but the premium fuel requirement means you're paying .20 more per gallon. That goes against the grain when it comes to saving money.

You shouldn't have to give up that much power and have to run on premium gas. The Mini One gets 50+ mpg. On regular gas. They're in the process of certifying it for the US market.

In my opinion, the Smart Car is a great idea, that needs a little more refinement. When they come up with one that gets 60+ mpg on regular gas, I'll be first in line to buy one

Till then, I'll keep freezing my butt off on my bike.

Hi Seanof30306:

___You have to look at it another way… Is the Smart Fortwo more comfortable than your Jeep? Probably so as here is a pic of Sean (all 6’-6” of him) behind the wheel of one in LA.

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/2/Sean_and_Tarabell_in_the_Smart_Fortwo.jpg

___Second item… If you have ever driven a Smart Fortwo, you will find out how much more attention you will receive vs. just about anything else this side of a Viper or Ferrari. They are like eye magnets… Read the following and you will know what I am writing about: CleanMPG Previews the 2008 SMART Fortwo (http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7133)

___Next item. It can carry groceries and run year round without you getting cold.

___Finally, it is not your everyday automobile. A Yaris or Fit makes more sense for a lot of reasons including both the fuel and the utility as has been discussed many times in the past here at CleanMPG.

___A Smart Fortwo is no different than someone purchasing a beautiful but impractical Pontiac Solstice or a 200 + mph capable ZR1. Both of these automobiles include far less room than a Smart Fortwo? In the case of the ZR-1, where are you going to drive 200 + mph as well?

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Well, this Sean is 6'5", and I fit just fine in my Jeep; it's one of the reasons I bought it.

And I couldn't disagree more with your statement that a Smart Car isn't an everyday car. That is exactly what it's supposed to be. 90+% of average driving in the US is in cars carrying two people, or less. The whole concept behind the Smart Car is to be an inexpensive commuter car; a daily driver.

In this country, we tend to buy vehicles with the worst-case scenario in mind. Take me, for example. The primary reasons for buying my Jeep were 1: I liked the way it looked, ans 2: it had all-wheel drive, so I could always get through in bad weather. It worked out well for me, I've never been stranded or been unable to get where I needed to go due to snow, ice, or rain. I've had the Jeep for 12 years. I've used the all wheel drive less than 20 times. Let's round it off and say I've used it for one month of my 144+ months of ownership. That means I've utilized the all wheel drive less than 1% of the miles I've put on it. Now, my Jeep is long paid for, and fully depreciated, so, once a car is available that meets my new set of needs, I'll buy it, and put a tarp on the Jeep till it snows. Much more efficient.

Or take my best friend. He has a boat that he keeps docked at a nearby lake. He drives an Excursion because he has to tow the boat out of the lake once per year, and tow it back once per year. All the rest of the time, he's driving over 100 miles per day at 12mpg. I recently pointed out that it would be a lot cheaper to get an economical car, and rent something to tow the boat twice per year.

Our economy's been booming, and gas has been cheap, so we here in the US believe we can't get by without our big vehicles. In Europe, they know better, because gas has been so much more expensive there, for a long, long time. 10 years ago, my girlfriend paid 6 bucks a gallon for gas in Germany.

Now, when the Smart Car was originally redesigned for the US market, gas was a lot cheaper, and it was believed that the US market's obsession with horsepower required they stroke the engine. Things are different now. Mini, for example, originally didn't bring the Mini One to the US market because they believed the lower fuel prices and the US's horsepower fever would equal minimal demand for it. I emailed them about the car lsat week, and was told they've been inundated with emails about it in recent months, and have begun the process of getting the Mini One certified for the US market.

If the Smart Car is going to be successful in the US market, it has to be accepted for it's original design purpose, to be an everyday commuter car, not an eco-version of a Corvette; a weekend special. I looked at one at a dealership the other day. The salesman told me the biggest reactions to the car were surprise at the EPA MPG ratings (people feel they're too low), and the fact that a "green" "economy" car has to have premium gas. I heard the same thing a few months ago at the Mini dealer.

Perception is reality; the first rule of marketing. The second rule of marketing is, if you have to explain it, or sell it, you've already lost the battle. While people in this country are getting greener every day, the greatest driver in demand for cars like this is a desire to save money. Everything about this car is directed towards developing that perception; the low sticker price, the percieved fuel economy, etc. The Smart Car is designed to be a very cool Yugo. Regardless of how hip and sporty it is, the niche the Smart Car is aimed at is economy, and you simply cannot have a successful economy car that must run on premium gas.

It doesn't sound like you've been in one.

It's a premium 'city car' - a quality product that is stylish, simple, safe, etc., etc. for the the urban or 'run into the village' country sophisticate. It's not meant to compete with Fits, etc.; motorcycles, yes.

Wait for the Toyota iQ due out next year. Same size and seats 4. I wll bet better FE also.

The Smart is German, which means there's plenty of room inside. German cars have to fit Germans after all.

I think the Smart is a great car, just too much money for us because we don't need a premium type car.

Ok, before the flames start flying, there is no hateration here. I love the idea of the Smart Car.

Every day, I'd drive to work in my Jeep Cherokee, and think how wasteful it is to haul one person around in a 4000lb vehicle.

So, I bought a motorcycle, and every time I stop off at the store to pick up a few things on the way home from work, I think about how much grief it is to ride a bike as daily transportation (especially when it rains!)

A small, two-seater with room for a little bit of cargo is the perfect compromise.

But, with a car that small, with a sub-1 litre engine, even the 55 mpg some hypermilers appear to be getting out of it is just unacceptable, especially when you're required to run premium fuel in it. My 1990 CRX HF got 45 mpg, and I'd never heard of hypermiling. I treated the throttle like an on/off switch, either idle or flat out, and revved it till the lifters floated in every gear. It's 1.5 litre engine was faster than a Smart Car, it held more cargo, and I could frequently stuff an unconscious fraternity brother in the rear area, allowing it to carry three drunks comfortably. It just amazes me that 18 years of technological development hasn't improved on that little CRX.

When you look at going green, there are two main concerns; saving resources, and saving money. The Smart Car clearly saves resources, burning less of a non-renewable resource, gasoline, but the premium fuel requirement means you're paying .20 more per gallon. That goes against the grain when it comes to saving money.

You shouldn't have to give up that much power and have to run on premium gas. The Mini One gets 50+ mpg. On regular gas. They're in the process of certifying it for the US market.

In my opinion, the Smart Car is a great idea, that needs a little more refinement. When they come up with one that gets 60+ mpg on regular gas, I'll be first in line to buy one

Till then, I'll keep freezing my butt off on my bike.

I agree with a lot of this. The Smart my be good for some, but for me to buy something that small it better get ridiculous FE. Like 60+!

My issue is why doesn't an exceptionally small car get exceptionally high FE?

It's essentially as if the Honda Insight's midsection was sawed off.

I agree with you Sean. I don't really get it. Of course, I own an Echo - a poor man's Yaris :-) I think that it would take 60 MPG to get me interested. Then I could hypermile it into the 70's. Like you say, I too just don't get it.

I think some are so enamored with the Smart car because they have been duped into thinking for the last 15 years that 30 mpg is great FE.

I agree and 93Hatch hit it correct. While the rest of the world lives in the reality of today, we are being convinced that 30 MPG is some sort of magic plateau. To go beyond it is truly miraculous and only a select few vehicles achieve it! Well, one company has 3 vehicles which can achieve 30 MPG or better according to TV.

I bought my Yaris last month after looking at all the alternatives… at least the ones I could afford. Never drove a smart but did look into them. Didn’t get one due to what I considered very low mileage for such a small vehicle. The Yaris was rated about the same and I get twice the vehicle! Besides, the Yaris was red and everyone knows red cars go faster.

I think some are so enamored with the Smart car because they have been duped into thinking for the last 15 years that 30 mpg is great FE.Heck, there was a Honda keicar they sold here in 1972 (predecessor to the Civic) that got 100mpg and I'm all but certain the original Beetle got 30mpg!

The advertisement for the Bug was "Gets an honest 25mpg" but many got mid 30s.

I too am disappointed by the FE of the Smart. A car of its size and level of acceleration should do much better. Some weak engineering going on, to be sure.

From a practical standpoint, most people are better off with a Prius, HCH or VW TDI, all of which get better mpg, hold a lot more and (if you believe car-mag reviews) are more fun to drive. We're sure happy with our hot red Golf TDI, and it's almost as cute as a Smart! ;)

Of course those cars don't have the park-ability of the Smart. In the city where I live, the tiny size would be beneficial on a regular basis.

i see a lot of Smart cars around here too, and I don't get it. They are quite small for American sensibilities but yet they don't get good gas mileage! How do you market that? Here, get rid of your big comfy car and get a teensy car but you're mileage will be about the same as a Civic and worse than many hatchbacks! Granted they're relatively inexpensive, but shouldn't FE be a major factor for the type of person who's gonna want that type of car? I was really excited about them and was SHOCKED when I found out the really mediocre mileage.

If I were to try to market the Smart, I would target it to folks that live in big towns with bad traffic and terrible parking, see themselves as having disposable income and want the latest, and point out that it retails for $12,700. That's half the price of a Harley Davidson Electra Glide. That should be a pretty big market. Are they having problems selling them?

I forgot to add that it gets about the same mpg as a big bore motorcycle, and cost the same or less than a more pedestrian Yaris or FIT

Hi All:

___Let us make a clear distinction about fuel efficiency. The Smart Fortwo has a higher EPA rating than every other vehicle available in the US other than the Prius-II and HCH-II. Could it have been more? You bet and a lot more as the Mitsubishi engine is a POS where FE and performance are concerned. That being said, can you find another $12,000 car that can deliver 36 mpgUS on the 08 combined and draw so much attention to itself? Sure the stick versions of the Jetta TDI, Yaris and Fit can be driven to far beyond the fuel economy capability of the manumatic equipped Smart Fortwo but that is not how the masses see it.

___When Europe gets there hands on the Toyota iQ, you will see that Mitsubishi mill in the Fortwo replaced about as fast as a stone falls to the floor. You can bet that next gen mill will include much better drivability, more performance and much higher fuel efficiency. If it does not, Toyota simply leaves the Fortwo's parked in dealership showrooms as the brand disappears overnight.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Just like most American vehicles (and some German ones) the Smart has been designed to be "peppy", and thus engineering was placed in gearing the vehicle for speed, not efficiency. In fact, the car was initially designed by Swatch to be a small, economical, fun car, primarily to act as a fashion statement.

The problem here is that the Americanized version of the Smart is just utter rubbish. It's a lot heavier, has a bigger engine, has that god-awful lurching manual-auto gearbox, and it is HUGE compared to the 1st gen Euro Smart. Like 1.2 feet longer-huge.

Unfortunately, the car is not to blame, it is the designers and federal regulations that this country has that have removed any of the original flare this vehicle had, and just made it another exclusive "toy".

The advertisement for the Bug was "Gets an honest 25mpg" but many got mid 30s.

In the owner's manual it said it got an overall mileage of 28mpg. I normally averaged 33mpg in my 68 VW beetle (1500cc), up to 40mpg on a 50mph highway cruise and 27mpg around town.

Sean,

You might want to consider sitting in one first and test-driving it before rejecting it out of hand due to comfort. From some of the reviews I've read (http://www.edmunds.com/smart/fortwo/2008/testdrive.html), the car seats tall/large people surprisingly well.

I really thought the car was neat when I first heard of it. I became a little more disappointed the more I learned, though. The MPG is just...okay considering how small it is (but still really good.) The thing I was most disappointed about was the price. At $7k or 8k, it's awesome, and I'd really, really think about devoting the money to buying one for puttering around town and occasionally driving to work (which for me, requires a trip on the highways...oddly, I live in the city and work in the suburbs.) At $11.5k MSRP (and closer to $14k fully equipped, and that's before tax/title,) there are plenty of other cars in that fuel economy ballpark that have a lot more usable space for about the same price. (Oh, and everyone has complained about the automanual transmission.)

Still, a cute car. And I'd feel safer taking the smart car on the highways instead of a motorcycle. (Just me though.)

The Smart Fortwo has a higher EPA rating than every other vehicle available in the US other than the Prius-II and HCH-II ... That being said, can you find another $12,000 car that can deliver 36 mpgUS on the 08 combined and draw so much attention to itself? Sure the stick versions of the Jetta TDI ... Good point about the TDI. 1999.5-2002 TDIs like mine were rated higher than the Smart (even under the '08+ EPA regime!), but the relatively thirstier new ones are not. I forgot about that.

And good point about the price. The Smart is barely half the price of any available hybrid.

i, too, dont get the smart4/2. weighs about the same as my insight, same size engine, about the same hp. storage space? i dont know. i have never run out of room in the insight, and never blocked my view out the back window. yet i have been averaging 76 mpg over the last 12 months. 10.6 seconds 0-60 vs 16 or 17? no thanks. (not that i do that very often, but its there. 70 mph in second is fun for highway merging ;) )

i guess i just dont get it...

Real small car like that is more geared to inner city driving, easy to park, easy to drive down narrow roads without losing wing mirrors, parking in tiny spots. I've seen em around in England a bunch. Maybe when the US gets more populated, houses built closer together etc they will make more sense.

The downfall of the smart is that it was designed by Daimler, i.e. Chrysler [until very recently] who have an amazing two cars that get 30 mpg.

i, too, dont get the smart4/2. weighs about the same as my insight, same size engine, about the same hp. storage space? i dont know. i have never run out of room in the insight, and never blocked my view out the back window. yet i have been averaging 76 mpg over the last 12 months. 10.6 seconds 0-60 vs 16 or 17? no thanks. (not that i do that very often, but its there. 70 mph in second is fun for highway merging ;) )

The magazines I've read show 0-60 MPH in about 12-13 seconds for the gas version....versus 11. Not much in it, is there?

That's fine if you don't get it, it is not a car for the masses (though it handily outsold the Insight).

Mine is a convertible, has deliciously comfortable heated seats, 4 airbags, ESP and ABS, cruise, electric headlight adjusters, shifter paddles, averages over 60 US MPG (diesel) lifetime on wide wheels and tires; the top is always down when the weather is nice and I do zippo to maximise fuel economy, just drive sensibly. I could average 75+ US MPG if I was committed, as others in Canada have done.

Summary: It is a unique car for certain people, not at all a competitor for the Yaris, Rio etc. People looking for the best fuel economy in a dirt cheap car ought not to even look at a smart.

Mike, you have a very nice car. :)

Personally, I think 60mpg is the "magic number" most people would expect to see out of a car that size. If the gas version got that I doubt many people here would compare it to the Yaris or Fit.

I should add that the smart is a bit like the original Insight, meaning not a car for everyone, but those who like them, love them. They're both really good at what they do for their owners.

As for the smart's status in the USA....Roger Penske estimated over a year ago that he could sell 20,000 per year. In this first year of sales, they will probably deliver about 28,000, and the waiting list is well over a year long now. Supply is the problem.

I've thought it might be fun to have a Smart as a second vehicle; like others, it is a tough compromise to make though. My Scion xB would be my "family truckster" and the Smart would be the commuter car. I figure if I had a 1 car garage, I might well fit both in there--the Scion is a full foot shorter than a Civic or Corolla, and the Smart of course is as short as it gets. Total length would be 210" which is a foot shorter than a Suburban! So efficiency can be measured in other ways than pure FE, though of course FE remains the key stat.

I should add that the smart is a bit like the original Insight, meaning not a car for everyone, but those who like them, love them. They're both really good at what they do for their owners.

As for the smart's status in the USA....Roger Penske estimated over a year ago that he could sell 20,000 per year. In this first year of sales, they will probably deliver about 28,000, and the waiting list is well over a year long now. Supply is the problem.

I think they are great to at least get people rethinking their transportation needs. But it really won't work for me and my commute. And Wayne, about drawing attention to myself that is really the least of my reasons for buying a car personally. That is what I perceive to be the motivation behind all the Escalade and Hummer purchases, the "look at me" factor. But then I guess those same people might consider the Smart car for the same reason. Hmm...

Re: mileage, my retired buddy's smart is getting 50mpg around town (country). He doesn't know from hypermiling. I'm not sure what more you'd expect from a gas car that's half the cost of a Prius?

I figure if I had a 1 car garage, I might well fit both in there...

I park my Peugeot 404 Coupé Injection (4.5 metres long) and the smart fortwo cdi (2.5 metres long) in tandem in my 7.5 metre deep garage with some room to spare!

Low amount of Parking Space was one main reason it was desireable; ... and FE.

It also boosted sales in Mb dealerships ... breathed some life into many lonely showrooms because of the low ticket.

Relatively low FE for its size is partly because an automatic uses up more power. Salespeople know that those sell better ... and inserting a manual among the mix sometimes just makes for more (and not necessarily as productive an) inventory. In that sales setting it seems obvious that taking away the stick-option also takes away some confusion (the extra words) , which like one poster already said (less words) 'clinches deals'.

(For example having a standard on the lot always showed a higher EPA on the window sticker; ... Mb dealers I don't believe had many sticks displayed as I recall)

Actually, parasitic losses from the manumatic in the Smart are minimal because it is nothing more than an automated manual transmission. There is a slight weight penalty -- that's about it.

The engine really is that inefficient. :(

Are eng-rpms and body-Cd both go too high for this size/type of car ?? :cool:

[The automatically-shifted manual is sometimes set to dictate higher shift speeds than what we get away with on the conventional manual ... this might also in-part contribute to lowering FE.]

According to Wayne (who reviewed this car) the shift points were pretty reasonable. It just isn't very efficient. Sort of like my cast iron block Elantra engine -- it is oversized and overpowered for the job. The only reason I get good numbers is the amount of I time I spend coasting ICE off.

The one I test drove ... same thing was noticeable (ie lots of throttle to make it go).

The sales department 'encouraged' to take it for a spin on the Highway. The on ramp was down in a bit of a valley where I needed to pull over just-quickly to adjust something (seat or seatbelt, .... I forget) . The salesman was surprised .... since he wanted me to rev it right there to match traffic flow merging on with the desired momentum in one smooth movement .... to show off it's fine power and performance.

But right there is where I realized full available power in use (no excess power left-over at that point) .... while re-engaging this two seat Smart Car in the restart up that grade ... full throttle, no luggage with minimum fuel .... showed its limit.

I guess you'd want to make sure a small engine like that has ample cooling at times .... who knows ... maybe that's got something to do with it.

The main problem with the fit is that the Corolla is so inexpensive. The Corolla is so cheap($13000 before the fuel runup with a MT), and so good-a casual driver can get 30 mpg city and 40 mpg hy- that it doesn't make any sense to buy anything else!!

The Smart is a great idea, but the Corolla is cheaper,and much more versatile.

The problem with all small cars is the Corolla- it is just too good a driving appliance for too little money!

Once GM brings in their 1.4 liter Cobalt replacement maybe the Corolla will actually have real competition.

I say all this even though I'm a bit of a Toyota "disliker." I like Honda much more than Toyota(despite 8 vs 2 Toyota vs Honda new cars), and a root for GM more than any of them(despite owning just 2 GMs, none new)).Toyota sells a lot of car for the $$(if you can get past their swindling dealers)
Charlie

What is the EPA estimated highway MPG? Something like 42 I think? That's what the highway EPA rating was on my '88 Escort when new. It'll seat 4 average size adults and a child reasonably comfortable and you still have a trunk for groceries, luggage, or just those packages from Walmart. Even with a 42 MPG Highway rating I'm getting almost 45 average over the last 7500 miles in city/highway combined driving. This is out of a 20 year old car that has nearly 500,000 miles on it and I can run regular gas. I agree that a car that size should be getting 60+ MPG.

You probably would be getting close to 60 if you drove a smart, if you can get 45 from an Escort. The EPA ratings are not at all comparable....

Hi Ford Man:

___From the 85 - 07 EPA to the 08 looking forward, there was an ~ 10 to 15% haircut due to the extra 3 test cycles. See the Hwy's and How to Hypermile article for more details.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Hello Ford Man,

Your post made me currious. I looked at the EPA ratings of the 88 Escort and the Smart. The Ford has a 24 mpg combined cycle versus 36 for the Smart. I can't find the weight of the Escort, but I suspect they are very similar. The 88 Festiva weighs 1700 # compared to the smart's 1800#.

It's not for everyone, but then, is any car?

Exactly. I see few people criticising people who buy a 2 seat Porsche like the Cayman or Boxster....because it only has two seats or can't haul a load of lumber. Those who like it will buy it, those who don't, won't.....and so it goes......

If logic and practicality were the sole mandates in car design- we'd all be driving Trabants and Zaporozhets. I'll keep my Miata, thank you. And cheer on the Smart.

Keith

Hello Ford Man,

Your post made me currious. I looked at the EPA ratings of the 88 Escort and the Smart. The Ford has a 24 mpg combined cycle versus 36 for the Smart. I can't find the weight of the Escort, but I suspect they are very similar. The 88 Festiva weighs 1700 # compared to the smart's 1800#.

It's not for everyone, but then, is any car?

It depends on whether you are looking at the old or new EPA ratings. The combined old rating on the '88 Escort Pony with a 1.9L 4 Speed is 37 MPG. I don't know the weight of the Escort either, but I'm sure it's a few hundred pounds heavier than the Festiva. I'm not against the Smart I just think they could have done better on FE.

I'd buy the electric smart just not the gas burner.

I like the Smart for city use for ease of parking, assuming the distances were too great for a bicycle and I didn't have to carry much with me.

But for most other uses I'd get a Fit MT or perhaps a Yaris MT over a Smart any day, given the insane mpg's people here are getting with them.

Still, the Smart, especially the convertible, ranks high on the cuteness factor (as does the Fit, which invariably makes me smile whenever I see one).

How about getting "insane plus" fuel economy in a convertible smart?

Frankly, the car is more at home on the highway than it is in the city.

Funny thing about these smart cars, While stationed In Germany as a US soldier, some other mischevious soldiers beligerantly drunk would often pick up these cars in groups of 4or more and move them down the street. Sometimes even flip them on their sides and take off before the polizei arrived. Ridiculous yes, but also funny..

Funny thing about these smart cars, While stationed In Germany as a US soldier, some other mischevious soldiers beligerantly drunk would often pick up these cars in groups of 4or more and move them down the street. Sometimes even flip them on their sides and take off before the polizei arrived. Ridiculous yes, but also funny..
Ah yes, nothing quite like getting drunk and turning cars over to improve international relations.

Ah yes, nothing quite like getting drunk and turning cars over to improve international relations.

Yeah, I have always been responsible and didn't participate in that but it does happen. :flag:

Yes, a laugh a minute.

Interesting discussion. I think the problem is that most people are trying to compare the smart with a fit, or a yaris, or a versa. If you are doing that, then the smart is not for you. I am not saying that to be rude, it's just the truth. When i told my wife that the smart was going to be avaialable in the US, she simply said"i want one". She didn't suggest we compare it to a Honda or anything. In fact, she has zero interest in owning a Fit or a yaris.
From a purely practical standpoint, the fit is a better value(at least the first gen was). But how many people will approach you in a parking lot and ask to look inside your fit? How many people will hang out the windows of their car to take a picture of your yaris as you drive by? The driving experience in a smart is unlike the other cars. As to cargo, mine holds a weeks worth of groceries..LOL

Blackbelt, I don't think there is another car on the market with the same appeal! I hope we get more. I think the original Insight had it? H

Nobody seems to give my Insight a second glance (unless they are mad because I can't accelerate like a Corvette) -- interesting since most people haven't seen one.

I like the Smart -- it just doesn't come with the mileage I think it ought to. The lack of a straight manual transmission doesn't help fulfill my wishes either...

You just don't notice it Sean? Both Insight and Smart are very unique auto's. H

I must admit that there are 3 Insights that park in the garage near my office building and I have met each of the owners because I still find them to be so unique. I haven't convinced any of them to come join us here yet, but I do wave or say hello (well we say "Hey" here in Louisville) when we are arriving or leaving at the same time. I'm still hopefully that they will come around soon.

I haven't been able to do that with any of the Smart owners in the garage (there are 5 that I have seen), but I am hopefully that I can be the 6th one when QVC calls to tell that I won one of the 12 that they are advertising on the site over the last few weeks. That would be sweet :D

The smart car is not for me, I don't like the way it looks. The gas mileage rating does not make up for this disparity. I'm not sure what the fun factor for this car is, so I cannot say anything about that, but from experts, usually a manual transmission with nice tires and decent suspension with a low stance gives great handling. I find a couple missing from the smart car.

If I had the money, would I go out and buy a corvette? maybe, maybe not. It all depends on what it's worth to you at that point in time. I don't think a time will ever come for me where I would go get the smart though.

Nobody seems to give my Insight a second glance (unless they are mad because I can't accelerate like a Corvette) -- interesting since most people haven't seen one.

Heh. I actually had a corvette honk at me last week, because I wasn't accelerating like a ... well... corvette! :p

Heh. I actually had a corvette honk at me last week, because I wasn't accelerating like a ... well... corvette! :p

Did you honk at him a mile down the road when he was filling in gas?:D

The smart car is not for me, I don't like the way it looks. The gas mileage rating does not make up for this disparity. I'm not sure what the fun factor for this car is, so I cannot say anything about that, but from experts, usually a manual transmission with nice tires and decent suspension with a low stance gives great handling. I find a couple missing from the smart car.

If I had the money, would I go out and buy a corvette? maybe, maybe not. It all depends on what it's worth to you at that point in time. I don't think a time will ever come for me where I would go get the smart though.

A big part of the smart appeal is it's unique styling. If you don't like the way it looks, then you are correct, it would make no sense for you to own one. There are other cars that can get the same or better mileage.

The smart cabriolet on wide wheels and tires is really very fun to drive. Even the very slow cdi diesel that I have owned for 4 years.

Given Mercedes reputation, how reliable is the smart car?

Heh. I actually had a corvette honk at me last week, because I wasn't accelerating like a ... well... corvette! :p
I had a Prius honk on me on a two lane highway. I guess his time was more important.

I've had Prius tailgate me and flash their brights while doing the aforementioned. Honking they do as they run away vs the jacked pickups they do it while tailgating and flashing

Given Mercedes reputation, how reliable is the smart car?

http://clubsmartcar.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=19977

At the above link are the breakdown data for 2007 from ADAC (the largest German motoring club). It's quite reliable, better than the Toyota Yaris for 2006 and 2007 model years. The figures are the # of breakdowns per 1000 vehicles.

:bananapartyhat:I do get the Smart Car. 13k since March. My best tank was 65 mpg from Laramie to SLC. I love the transmission. Waiting for the mileage chip. Don't believe a lot of the baloney you hear about this car. It's a blast!

I've had Prius tailgate me and flash their brights while doing the aforementioned. Honking they do as they run away vs the jacked pickups they do it while tailgating and flashing

There are a lot of really dumb prius drivers who do way over the speed limit and likely only get 30 mpg because of theri driving style.

That said, other than the parking efficiency, I see no practical reason to buy a smart car when a prius can give well over 40 MPG while providing cavernous space... meanwhile the smart giving precious little over 40 on the highway.

:bananapartyhat:I do get the Smart Car. 13k since March. My best tank was 65 mpg from Laramie to SLC. I love the transmission. Waiting for the mileage chip. Don't believe a lot of the baloney you hear about this car. It's a blast!

What is the mileage chip?

Also, is there anyone who has driven the Smart Car on regular gas? Most cars requiring premium fuel do so because the manufacturer has tuned the car to optomize it for power. My neighbor has a 2007 Corvette, which also requires premium fuel. He bumped the base timing up two degrees and runs 87 octane with no problems. He has an automatic, and a manual, with it's tendency to lug, and therefore detonate, could be more problematic, but I wonder if you could bump the timing on a Smart Car a bit and run good old 87 octane?

You know what I'd buy in a minute? A GNG Smart Car with a home fill. My buddy has a CNG Honda and loves it to death.

When Wayne did a review on the car a while back he asked and was specifically told that the car would run regular grade fuel just fine.

That said, other than the parking efficiency, I see no practical reason to buy a smart car when a prius can give well over 40 MPG while providing cavernous space... meanwhile the smart giving precious little over 40 on the highway.Well there might be one practical reason. You can get a Smart for about Ten Thousand Dollars less.

I am seeing a lot more of them. In NM we have no parallel parking, big wide streets, but tiny garages. I think that might be what is so appealing. I can think of all sorts of extra things that could go in my garage! OTOH, I don't know about them in a (still) world of SUVs despite the apparently excellent safety record.

BTW, I am seeing guys in them. I think it might be a great chick magnet. I think that a guy who drives one is secure. LOL!

--des