Article Comments: 2008 Smart Fortwo First Look and Drive

65 messages, Last post on Jun 22, 2008 at 7:42 AM

You are in the Smart Car Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer

What is this discussion about? smart fortwo, Hatchback

Article comments for First Look: 2008 Smart Fortwo - Americans' newfound love affair with small cars is about to be tested with the arrival of the 2008 Smart Fortwo. (more)

First Drive: 2008 Smart Fortwo Passion - Once you get some momentum together, it's a pleasure to drive the Smart. Despite its short 73.5-inch wheelbase, the Fortwo absorbs bumps and potholes quite well. The ride quality isn't exactly as supple as a Maybach, but the motions are surprisingly gentle. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 5 of 7: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; Prev; Next; Last

#35 of 65 Re: ForFour [nickvacca] by edf4 Apr 23, 2007 (4:57 pm)
Replying to: nickvacca (Apr 20, 2007 4:33 pm) Sorry to disappoint you Nick, but there are no plans to bring over the FourFour. In fact, even overseas I believe the FourFour is dead. Just not profitable and plagued with maintainance issues when it was available. Nope, the two seater is all it will be, though it will be a great one. The dismal (compared to the new one) old one sold over 700,000 world-wide to date. This will far exceed than number. Many, including myself, expect this to do as well, if not better than the Mini has done, and they will likely hear footsteps. The fortwo is stylish, hip, and cool, with a conservative combined estimate of 40mpg. For the times when you need to carry more than two people, if you don't have another car, take a taxi or rent a larger car. And if you're "smart", you'll "reserve" one for yourself like thousands have already done - go to their website and see what I mean.
#36 of 65 Re: Geez, give 'em a break already! [swordsman] by demosthenes Jun 09, 2007 (9:44 pm)
Replying to: swordsman (Dec 04, 2006 8:27 am) "If you'd take the time to research the subject, you'd find crash test videos of smarts hitting concrete walls at 70 mph with nary a bend in the frame..." I saw this video, and the people who made it pointed out that while the car survived reasonably well, any human occupants wouldn't have. "You're comparing bare-bones Honda's and Toyotas to fully loaded smarts..." According to smartusa.com, a basic smart fortwo pure IS pretty bare-boned -- it not only doesn't have air-conditioning, it doesn't even have a radio! Their list price for a fortwo pure is "starting under $12,000" (excluding tax, license, registration, destination charges and options). Not exactly cheap.
#37 of 65 Good Value? by plekto Jun 10, 2007 (10:27 am)
You are forgetting that even the most basic Smart has a level of safety features that you have to jump up to a Honda Fit to get and as for drivetrain options like stability control, traction control. and the like, you have to jump to nearly $20K to find on a car these days. As near as I can tell, nearly $2000 of that price is the safety equipment and handling options. It's a tremendous deal, IMO. The Passion is nice as well, but only if I could order it without half of the bling(or the Pure with a couple of them like foglights) This is like comparing the Jeep Patriot to the competition. It's maybe 70% as good but gosh - for what you get, $16K is a steal. Find me another off-road capable SUV with 4x4 for $16K. Right - doesn't exist(and AWD in't 4x4 either). Now, it does have a lot of little issues that need to be resolved, to be sure, but it's a good deal.
#38 of 65 safety by fortwo Jun 14, 2007 (3:10 pm)
The smart is designed for safety. I've seen it go against a fiat, merc s-class, e-class, and a honda s2000.The design of the shell is formed like a hard walnut. In a Honda S2000 crash, the driver of Honda went into a coma while the driver of the smart fortwo walked away unharmed. Despite the design of the vehicle, people will still have that trepidation. I know I did. When I test drove the new "451" fortwo, I was constantly aware of my surroundings. Moreso with a manual tranny car. When you turn your head, the rear window is 2-3 feet away from you. It takes some getting used to. HD http://smartcarfan.blogspot.com/
#39 of 65 Re: Geez, give 'em a break already! [swordsman] by luvcutethings Jun 20, 2007 (9:15 am)
Replying to: swordsman (Dec 04, 2006 8:27 am) I thoroughly love what you say. I just learned about the Smart coming to the U.S., and I can't wait to test drive one. I'm sorry to read that some folks are skeptical about the car's safety, maneuverability, etc. I've driven a Volvo, a Saturn, a Toyota Matrix, and a '67 bug. I loved the bug the best -- even though I had to scrape the inside AND outside of the windshield while driving. Great on the highway, in town, and in snow. Now, if the Smart car is all that the driver in Ontario claims, then I will have made one of the best auto purchases in my life. The price is right, the safety, too, and the mileage -- why spend so much for a hybrid when the Smart might do even better. And, have you read the environmental info. on producing and recycling this thing? So, move over bug, here come's da smart.
#40 of 65 New article! by KarenS HOST Jun 20, 2007 (9:35 am)
The Smart Fortwo "Street Smart" Road Show. Replies to this message: plekto (Jun 20, 2007 11:03 am)
#41 of 65 Re: New article! [KarenS] by plekto Jun 20, 2007 (11:03 am)
Replying to: KarenS (Jun 20, 2007 9:35 am) He does get a few little things wrong, though. It must have been a Euro version that he drove, since the U.S. spec version that I drove had the 1.0L engine and the seats were side by side. Handling was very good, actually - though it doesn't FEEL like it.(this is sort of like driving a SUV for the first time - if feels high and tippy for the first few days). This feels low and like it will roll over. Trust me - it really won't unless you do something really crazy that would tip or roll a normal car. Trust me - it can be manhandled a lot. The extra few inches of width plus more aggressive tires make it very stable at speed. What I liked most(the transmission was odd, though), was the fact that it was RWD and has a very good weight distribution - so it's a lot like the Toyota MR2 in many ways. Not a screamer like the Celica GT-S, but a fun little two-seater. Just imagine that the hood area on the MR2 was shrunk to 2 ft(all of it crumple zone).
#42 of 65 Smart Car, Smart Decisions by bentleyr Aug 19, 2007 (1:38 pm)
As an auto enthusiast for many years now, I have been searching for a vehicle that would allow me the luxury of traveling various places without huge outlays of gas cash. With the threat of gasoline skyrocketing, I have been tempted to invest in hybrids, but have restrained myself. I wanted a light car with a small engine, something Colin Chapman of Lotus fame proved was not only viable, but wonderful. In college (1972) I bought a Honda 600: it took me everywhere with a top speed of 76mph and 36 hp. It was inexpensive to operate and was very reliable. The Smart Car Fortwo is a modern version of that car, with much better safety and much better drivability and about the same gas mileage, I would imagine. I'll have another car if I want to go faster, but for getting from point A to point B, the Smart car looks very smart indeed. I don’t understand why we waste gas in this country so needlessly. If it were up to me, I would legislate that every vehicle had to be less than 2000 lbs. I’m tired of the SUV drivers pretending they have something other than expensive station wagons that block the view ahead.
#43 of 65 We need real MPG! by realmpg Nov 10, 2007 (10:20 am)
40 MPG is not going to cut it. What we really need in a gasoline fueled vehicle is 70+ MPG, Or an electric vehicle with a top speed of 55 MPH and a range of 150+ miles for our city commuters. Sorry, but the FORTWO will be a bust in the U.S. We already have several four and five seater vehicles on the market that get 40+ MPG. My old 1995 Buick Regal still gets 25 MPG in town and 32 on the highway, with no speed restrictions and carries five. You would think that the auto makers would have at least doubled the MPG by now.
#44 of 65 You could go 100+mpg... by intel_guy Nov 14, 2007 (1:04 pm)
1.0 liter turbo diesel. The 1.3l VW lupo diesel already gets >80mpg, but its not available in the US (wonder why, big oil???). Modern diesel technology is much cleaner and faster than the diesel cars of the 80s. That turbo really adds some kick. I can get my Golf up to 115mph and still get 42mpg highway. If I go 65-70mph for a whole tank I get >50mpg. I drive 80% highway. Since I got my diesel I'll never go gasser again. Also, most people dont realize that, within reason(say, .50 difference), the price of fuel has almost no impact on your yearly fuel cost. It's fuel economy that matters. But for drivers of gas guzzlers, they are vain and trying to say that they have the $ to spend.