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

#47 of 65 First Drive! by KarenS HOST Nov 21, 2007 (8:51 am)
First Drive: 2008 Smart Fortwo Passion
#48 of 65 Manual tranny for the US? by baccus49 Nov 30, 2007 (8:40 am)
I want one of these cars, but this semi-auto thing sounds like it works poorly. Will they bring a manual tranny version to the US? Replies to this message: bumpy (Nov 30, 2007 9:39 am)
#49 of 65 Re: Manual tranny for the US? [baccus49] by bumpy Nov 30, 2007 (9:39 am)
Replying to: baccus49 (Nov 30, 2007 8:40 am) There is no conventional manual option for it; the car wasn't designed for one. Most of the problems with the transmission come from people driving it like a slushbox automatic rather than a manual.
#50 of 65 This one is funny! by 6sptl Nov 30, 2007 (1:46 pm)
If you take a turd and dress it up in daisies, what do you get? A turd with flowers!!!!! The Mini is a poor excuse for a car, not because of its size but because there are go karts that brake, handle, accelerate and give better fuel economy than it. I'm sure it will be as succesful as the Yugo, the Yugo sold because it was cheap, the Smart will sell because its cute. After a year or two the word will get out about what a piece of crap they are and then they will quickly disappear from the marketplace leaving a whole bunch of customers floating in the breeze with broken down junk yard adornments . BUYERS BEWARE!!!!!!!! Replies to this message: plekto (Dec 03, 2007 4:21 pm)
#51 of 65 Re: This one is funny! [6sptl] by plekto Dec 03, 2007 (4:21 pm)
Replying to: 6sptl (Nov 30, 2007 1:46 pm) Funny, people have been saying that about the Smart for TEN YEARS. This is exactly like the Prius - the first generation model was tested extensively in Japan for many years before being brought over to the U.S. The Smart is different, quirky, but it's the modern equivalent of a VW Bug. Small, inexpensive, cute, gets good gas mileage, and thanks to boatloads of high tech engineering wizardry, just as safe as any other subcompact. Yes, I do mean a LOT of engineering wizardry. the entire car is designed from the ground-up to survive a crash, very much like how a modern F1 race car is. You don't so much repair these as replace them as a result, but they DO fare well enough in crash tests in Europe, which are admittedly a harder standard than here in the U.S. I'd certainly rather be in one in an accident than an old Suzuki Swift or a Early 90s Civic hatchback. Oh - that 40mpg is combined MPG. Expect something like 35 city/45 highway in actual use. The transmission is actually quite fast shifting, but it has to be driven like a manual because it IS a manual. ie - it's "robotized" and does the clutch for you. This means you need to lift OFF THE GAS like in a manual for a split second or else the computers will override you to keep from burning the clutch between shifts. Like in a manual - you don't mash the gas to the floor and hold it there between shifts. That's automatic transmission behavior. And it's not an automatic. In a test I recently took(second one - yay! Living in Los Angeles has its benefits!) - all it takes is 2/10ths of a second release on the gas as you hit the shifter to work exactly like the manual that it is. If you mash it there and let the computer do its thing... you get the slowness that most people complain about. The old Toyota MR2 had an identical option and for people who understood how to drive it(90% didn't) it was fine. The paddles help incredibly. And there is what appears to be a 3-5 day learning curve(based upon my progress), like knowing how to let of the throttle on a motorcycle a little bit between shifts. Every one is different and this is no exception.
#52 of 65 Sweetness. by bumpy Dec 05, 2007 (1:47 pm)
I'm going to the last of the road tours Saturday, so I'll give it a more involved workout this time around. (The first one I went to, the line was over 2 hours long and it was 90-something degrees out, so I just did the basic around-the-block drive.) Replies to this message: 6sptl (Dec 06, 2007 12:58 pm) plekto (Dec 07, 2007 2:24 pm)
#53 of 65 About shifting by sbonhartwell Dec 06, 2007 (3:37 am)
Does this car have a clutch. I read that you have to change gears and the electronics assist. It appears that a clutch is not necessary. am I correct here? Thanks Replies to this message: bumpy (Dec 06, 2007 7:51 am) plekto (Dec 06, 2007 11:53 am)
#54 of 65 Re: About shifting [sbonhartwell] by bumpy Dec 06, 2007 (7:51 am)
Replying to: sbonhartwell (Dec 06, 2007 3:37 am) The transmission is built exactly a like a conventional manual. The differences are that the throwout bearing for the clutch is operated by a computer-controlled solenoid instead of a cable attached to a clutch pedal; and the shift forks in the gearbox are operated by more solenoids, instead of cables attached to a conventional manual shift lever. Replies to this message: plekto (Dec 06, 2007 11:53 am)
#55 of 65 Re: About shifting [bumpy] by plekto Dec 06, 2007 (11:53 am)
Replying to: bumpy (Dec 06, 2007 7:51 am) Correct. So you need to lift off the gas a tiny bit between shifts or else the computers will jump in to keep you from grinding the clutch between shifts. This also means that automatic is NOT an option driving this if you want any sort of acceleration. You need to use those paddles or shifter and manually shift all the time as there is no torque converter(!). That is, it can't really be driven in automatic mode very well because you can't tell when the thing wants to shift without the computers going into nanny mode, and therefore when to exactly lift off of the gas. You end up with 1 second shifts because you guessed wrong. Running it in manual mode solves this problem. Me? I plan to get those paddles and run it around like a motorcycle.(most motorcycles have the clutch on the handlebars - so you shift with your fingers essentially, not too unlike this) I got used to this, btw, on my old 1967 Mercedes 230S. It was set up for an identical system, believe it or not, so while mine as a manual, the clutch was still all solenoid controlled. I'd press the pedal, which was on a heavy spring, and it would trip a small switch. Very fast and smooth, very hard to burn the clutch as well. But it took a few days to get used to.(4 speed on the column was harder - lol)
#56 of 65 Re: Sweetness. [bumpy] by 6sptl Dec 06, 2007 (12:58 pm)
Replying to: bumpy (Dec 05, 2007 1:47 pm) Although the smart has been around for 10 years it is still to turn a profit. It was originally made in Switzerland and then it moved production god knows where. It has been in the chopping block for MB for years but as the concorde it seems that European manufacturers never know when to kill an unprofitable contraption. The smart looks great but its engineering and performance are more akin to a car designed made in India or the former USSR. I drove a limited edition "Blade" model in France and it was a horrible expirience, weak engine, horrid tranny, limp brakes and steering plus (for its size) mediocre fuel economy. As Consumer Reports has reported it is probably the worst performing car in the last decade. To make matters worse reliability is reported to be truly bad (70's Fiat bad). Again CAVEAT EMPTOR Replies to this message: plekto (Dec 07, 2007 2:24 pm)