You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views
What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

8653 messages, Last post on Nov 27, 2009 at 6:22 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: ttai (Dec 06, 2007 8:51 pm) a roof. I would say its more like a ATV or quad with a roof. I think there is a perception that a go-cart handles well, is low to the ground, and eh mid-engined. I think the Fiero/MR2 fit the bill better than the Smart, and the Fiero was originally designed for the same niche market. I had a motorcycle so taking this thing on the freeway is no problem for me. A motorcycle has the ability to maneuver out of trouble and can go from 0-60 in 1/3 the time of the Smart, leaving a lot of options to, as my driving instructor would say, "be somewhere else." |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ttai (Dec 06, 2007 8:51 pm) Its not governmental accounting its basic statistics. In cases like this you become very critical of extreme highs or lows in reporting something like this as abnormalities. People can misremember, calculate wrong, have wrong facts or just outright lie. When something lies way outside the norm, say like everyone reporting between 32 and 36 MPG and someone comes along and reports 42MPG you should look at the 42 with suspect. Either way the Smart does really beat the Yaris by a long shot if it gets what the Canadian website claims. $12K for a car that does everything I need it to do and gets above 40 city sounds like a winner in my book.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: robertsmx (Dec 06, 2007 10:26 pm) Per the EPA website the Fit gets 34 Highway. big difference. But we will see when we get the EPA estiments
|
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Dec 06, 2007 4:17 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: snakeweasel (Dec 07, 2007 5:03 am) I too think that would be great, unfortunately the Smart isn't that car for me. I think a 3-5 year old VW TDI would be a lot closer for me, especially since the hwy mileage is a bigger factor for me than city.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: snakeweasel (Dec 06, 2007 6:59 pm)
|
|
| 5.9 L/100 km is 39.875 miles per US gallon | |
|
|
|
Replying to: boaz47 (Dec 06, 2007 4:17 pm) However, you are 100% wrong saying there is no virtue to making do w/less (which I don't see as a sacrifice anyway). If EVERYONE in the US got 2 MPG better we would be MUCH better off. I don't care what the Chinese do. If they want to purchase more, so be it. If we can cut down on our polution and our dependence on foreign oil not only are we better off, but more importantly our children are as well. I don't like being at the beckon call of dictators who hate us and want to end our way of life. All these people claiming "I can do what I want" won't be able to much longer if we continue to live so frivolously.
|
|
|
Replying to: snakeweasel (Dec 07, 2007 5:08 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: dgecho1 (Dec 07, 2007 5:48 am) Sub Compacts have as much right on our roads as any other car, that has never been an issue or the question. We have just shown as a society a preference for something more comfortable or with more power and yes even something as large as a SUV. It does not make US consumers evil simply because we haven't embraced the plight of drivers in other countries. We had clean air standards when Europe was still burning peat as heating fuel up to about 15 years ago. No one assumed they were evil because they were spewing dirt into the air and didn't care about American air. we simply have a different lifestyle and SUV and quad cab trucks work for us better than they do for people in other countries. We have no reason to feel guilty for being successful as a nation and for taking advantage of that success. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views
What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Nissan Versa
2010 Toyota Yaris
2010 Honda Fit
2009 smart fortwo
2010 MINI Cooper



Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats