Sign In Join 



What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

8674 messages,  Last post on Dec 01, 2009 at 11:23 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Nissan Versa, Toyota Yaris, Honda Fit, smart fortwo, MINI Cooper


Messages Page 843 of 868
1
...
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
...
868
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#8420 of 8674
Re: how about the ford fiesta? [igozoomzoom] by ateixeira
May 19, 2009 (11:33 am)
Reply

Replying to: igozoomzoom (May 19, 2009 9:12 am)

Cool, my roommate in college had one of those.
 
I dropped her off at the air port one time and drove it home for her. It didn't feel slow at all, but again that was an 1800 lb car.
 
Hers was probably a later model, I think it had 62hp.
 
I looked at those in 1991, but ended up in an Escort GT with 127hp. I guess I was tired of not being able to go up hills with the A/C on.
 
I recall looking at the price, and the HF was $300 cheaper than the LX or DX, IIRC, but those made 92hp. Then I thought...$30 per horse is a bargain. Didn't buy either, but I do remember shopping for them.
 
I don't think the problem today is a lack of horsepower, when even the cheapest cars break 100hp. It's weight. It's scary how many fairly basic cars weigh over 3000 lbs.
#8421 of 8674
Re: how about the ford fiesta? [andre1969] by snakeweasel
May 19, 2009 (1:53 pm)
Reply

Replying to: andre1969 (May 19, 2009 9:47 am)

Seriously, that's probably more than adequate for most driving.
 
It is, a while back we timed ourselves in normal traffic. Typical 0-40mph times was between 12-15 seconds for a line of traffic coming off a stop light.
#8422 of 8674
Re: how about the ford fiesta? [snakeweasel] by fezo
May 19, 2009 (2:02 pm)
Reply

Replying to: snakeweasel (May 19, 2009 1:53 pm)

My slow car was a 69 Volvo 142. It was O once you got up to speed but that was quite some time. Could be worse. It could have been an automatic. Or had air conditioning.
#8423 of 8674
Re: i tried to... [lilengineerboy] by explorerx4
May 19, 2009 (3:37 pm)
Reply

Replying to: lilengineerboy (May 18, 2009 4:11 pm)

i was thinking about lobbying for a '101', but we are just too busy.
#8424 of 8674
Re: how about the ford fiesta? [fezo] by snakeweasel
May 19, 2009 (5:15 pm)
Reply

Replying to: fezo (May 19, 2009 2:02 pm)

I had a friend from high school who had a 142 (not sure what year it was). His uncle gave it to him in our senior year in high school with a little over 200K on it. It was an ok car but reliable as all heck. I think he took it to well over 400K on the original engine and tranny. IIRC it had a 2 liter engine.
#8425 of 8674
Re: how about the ford fiesta? [snakeweasel] by fezo
May 19, 2009 (6:04 pm)
Reply

Replying to: snakeweasel (May 19, 2009 5:15 pm)

You couldn't kill those things. I had mine up to 144K. It needed some work and had a bit of rust. It was one of those put some money into it or move on moments. They type where today I'd put the money into it. I was 26 at the time. 22 when I bought it.
#8426 of 8674
Is slow the new black? by ateixeira
May 20, 2009 (6:14 am)
Reply
LOL
#8427 of 8674
Re: Is slow the new black? [ateixeira] by thegraduate
May 20, 2009 (8:02 pm)
Reply

Replying to: ateixeira (May 20, 2009 6:14 am)


 
Yes... both!
#8428 of 8674
Re: Is slow the new black? [thegraduate] by andre1969
May 21, 2009 (5:54 am)
Reply

Replying to: thegraduate (May 20, 2009 8:02 pm)

From what I've read, the Smart can do 0-60 in around 12-13 seconds, depending on who you want to believe. I found one quarter mile stat of around 19.2 seconds at 70.5 mph. And I think top speed is electronically limited to 90 mph.
 
So, while it won't knock your socks off, it's still probably more than adequate for most needs. The only thing I'd worry about is highway merging. The 12-13 second 0-60 time doesn't scare me so much, but the quarter mile time does, and implies to me that the car is starting to get pushed to its limit after 60. For comparison, Consumer Reports tested a 1968 Dodge Dart with a 225 slant six (I remember this only because I used to own a similar 1969, so I know how it performed) and while it took them 14 seconds to get from 0-60, the quarter mile came in at 19 seconds at 72 mph. So, to get from 60 to 72 mph, it only took that car 5 seconds, while it's taking the Smart more like 6-7 seconds to get from 60 to 70.5 mph.
 
And FWIW, that Dart seemed perfectly capable at the time, although I'm sure if I had it to drive today, it wouldn't be nearly as good as I remember!
 
I also wonder then, how the Smart would do in highway passing? Such as, if you're cruising along at 65-70 and want to pass, but traffic in the passing lane is rolling past at a much faster clip. Would the Smart have the guts to pass safely?
#8429 of 8674
Re: Is slow the new black? [andre1969] by bumpy
May 21, 2009 (7:59 am)
Reply

Replying to: andre1969 (May 21, 2009 5:54 am)

It's not that big of a deal. Just plan out your spot, drop down a gear or two, then drop the hammer on it. If that's not enough for you, there is the turbo kit.

Messages Page 843 of 868
1
...
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
...
868
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement