Article Comments 2008 Smart Fortwo First Drive

110 messages, Last post on Aug 07, 2008 at 8:31 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 Drive: 2008 Smart Fortwo - The 2008 Fortwo is larger than its predecessor, but it's still outrageously small, some 40 inches shorter than a Mini. In real life, it looks like an artist's impression of what a car might look like if we all drank skinny lattes. (more)

Full Test: 2008 Smart Fortwo Passion - Bottom Line: Hugely versatile as a city-only car, but perhaps not the best choice for those who go farther or need to carry more. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 6 of 12: 1; ...; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; ...; 12; Prev; Next; Last

#46 of 110 Re: Dumb Smart [joe131] by snakeweasel Mar 02, 2007 (5:07 pm)
Replying to: joe131 (Mar 02, 2007 4:47 pm) I just guess differently. I place a lot of importance on having the option of carrying 4 adults at a time and a lot of luggage in a car that does not cost more than a Smart, There are very few cars that will cost as less as the smart (based on what I have read) and of those cars I do not want to be the adult passenger in the back seat. But my whole point is that it would make the perfect "second" car, in that case the 4 adults could fit in the larger mid or large sedan. As I primary car the Smart would not be the best option for most. Here is how I am looking at it, wife gets a mid sized sedan husband gets a Smart. Both drive their cars to and from work. If short trip for errands are needed either car can be used. If 4 adults want to go out for dinner or you take that long driving vacation take the mid sized sedan. Yes, I agree it is the perfect commuter car if that person does almost nothing but drive alone or with one other person, I am not sure where you are at but most cars I see on my daily commute only have one person in it.
#47 of 110 Re: Really? [plekto] by snakeweasel Mar 02, 2007 (5:10 pm)
Replying to: plekto (Feb 28, 2007 11:09 pm) Thinking about what you said. Do you think that Smarts might someday start replacing these?
#48 of 110 Exactly! by plekto Mar 02, 2007 (7:23 pm)
Yes, they are even more iconic looking(huge "double-take" factor), and the passenger seat, if it's removed or folded forward like the Xb(can't imagine it won't) will make a good area to keep a laptop and such. * I place a lot of importance on having the option of carrying 4 adults at a time and a lot of luggage in a car that does not cost more than a Smart, and which gets as good or nearly as good fuel economy. I'll also guess that service and parts and depreciation will favor Yaris, Accent, Aveo, Fit and the like. And the Smart is just too dang slow if it hits 60 in 13 or more seconds. Maybe that fits in well with European traffic, but it won't in the U.S. * I'll tell you that a Yaris' backseat is a total desperation move for most adults. I hit my head, no I had to duck my head and keep it hunched over and I'm 5'7". And the Aveo and Yaris are actually LESS safe in a crash. I'd give the Fit a tiny edge in an accident, and it's a superb car, but it's also 4 thousand more - without stability control, either. No leather, no upscale CD/Audio, and no convertible option. Shoot the seat doesn't even have a height adjustment in the U.S. version of the Fit, and the visors are still in Japanese trim(driver gets the only mirror - passenger has none?) Btw, Consumer Reports tested the Fit with the automatic(they don't do stick ever, unless an automatic isn't available) and it was well over 10 seconds 0-60. Something like 12. The new Smart is eating about 5-10mpg (still silly high, just not 60mpg highway) to get a bigger engine. Consider an old Civic CRX or an old second generation Toyota Tercel. 80-90hp, and about 2000lbs. And a whole generation of peolpe drove and loved their little cars. This will be just fine. Won't win any drag-strip shootouts, but neither did the Merto, CRX, Tercel, or simmilar. Replies to this message: snakeweasel (Mar 02, 2007 8:29 pm)
#49 of 110 Re: Exactly! [plekto] by snakeweasel Mar 02, 2007 (8:29 pm)
Replying to: plekto (Mar 02, 2007 7:23 pm) The front seat of the Smart is supposed to fold down. Won't win any drag-strip shootouts, but neither did the Merto, CRX, Tercel, or simmilar. Funny thing is there were many riced out CRX's around here that thought they could out run just about anything.
#50 of 110 Whoa guys by pat HOST Mar 03, 2007 (10:14 am)
This is getting way too personal as well as being off-topic. The subject of this discussion is the article on the First Drive as indicated by the subject and the header at the top of the page. What do you think about the article itself? We'd really like some feedback. Now we have a dedicated discussion - let's go to smart fortwo for further conversation about the vehicle itself... but please leave the personal confrontations behind.
#52 of 110 Pictures! by plekto Mar 14, 2007 (11:18 am)
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=15&article_id=4521 Of note is the shot of the boot/trunk. They widened the car so that you sit side by side. Then they lengthened the rear by 6-8 inches. That makes the rear suddenly as large as a typical hatchback's(area behind the rear seats). That's huge compared to the original models. At least 18 inches deep and 30-36 inches wide by the looks of it(and as tall as the roof, plus a wide opening hatch).
#53 of 110 Underwhelming results. Road test of DumbSmart [plekto] by joe131 Mar 16, 2007 (1:40 am)
Replying to: plekto (Feb 24, 2007 10:48 am) Car & Driver road test. Smart zooms from 0-60 mph in 15.5 seconds! Sips fuel (2008 EPA estimates) at an astonishing 31 mpg city, 43 mpg highway! Wowee! So, based on my experiences with EPA estimates and actual driving, it looks like drivers may get in the low to mid 30 mpg range in mixed driving. (And yes, I know the test procedure has been changed to suggest lower mpg compared to 2007 numbers.) And, it will drag itself from 0-60 in no big hurry at all. A run to 60 in 15.5 seconds is just plain S L O W . I said it before and I'll say it again: "If they only get 40 mpg combined hwy/cty then they'll flop big time. US likes bigger, not smaller when it comes to cars. A person would have to give up too much in the way of size, comfort and utility to make the extra few mpg attractive. Look at Toyota Yaris. You get 4 doors, nice handling, comfort and space for about the price of the Smart. And the Yaris still gets around 35 mixed gas mileage. Smart sounds dumb to me." Replies to this message: snakeweasel (Mar 16, 2007 4:11 am) drums148 (Mar 17, 2007 6:17 pm)
#54 of 110 Re: Underwhelming results. Road test of DumbSmart [joe131] by snakeweasel Mar 16, 2007 (4:11 am)
Replying to: joe131 (Mar 16, 2007 1:40 am) And, it will drag itself from 0-60 in no big hurry at all. A run to 60 in 15.5 seconds is just plain S L O W . Don't do much city driving do you? The Smart is targeted to urban areas where traffic congestion is high. 0-60 times in most urban driving is irrelevant as you can only go as fast as the car in front of you. If you are more than a few cars back at a stop light you will never accelerate much faster than a Smart will. if your the first in line accelerating faster just means you get behind the cars at the next light just that much faster. in urban areas 0-60 in 15.5 seconds is meaningless. Look at Toyota Yaris. You get 4 doors, nice handling, comfort and space for about the price of the Smart. And the Yaris still gets around 35 mixed gas mileage If I am not mistaken the Yaris will still cost more than the Smart and will still get less gas mileage (most Yaris drivers driving mostly city, over 50%, report low 30's). So in the overall scheme of things the Yaris will cost you more. Why should I spend more money just to get a back seat that I will never use? While the Smart sounds dumb to you to someone who looks at it realistically it makes perfect sense.
#55 of 110 You're forgetting a couple of things by plekto Mar 16, 2007 (3:46 pm)
The Smart will have ABS, side airbags, traction control, stability control... Wait... A Civic doesn't get those things standard. Close, but not all of it.(maybe with some uber-premium package) The closest competitor feature-wise is a Mini. This thing even can be had with leather, real premium sound, and a convertible top. Sounds a lot like a 2 person Mini/Mini sans the nearly useless rear seats) and not a Yaris. It also will likely have the same cult-ish folowing as the Mini, since both look 200% like well, nothing else on the road. It's the small car equivalent of a 6wd Army transport. People stare at it I suspect that if they opted for a real manual gearbox, they would just do about 35/45, or 40 in mixed driving. When Toyota gives you A/C, ABS, TC, ESC, and Side Airbags in a Yaris all for $12-$13K, then we have something to compare it against. Btw - how large is the gas tank? If it's only 6-8 gallons, that limts range. Otoh, if it's 12 or 13... we could be looking at 400-500 miles between fillups. Replies to this message: snakeweasel (Mar 16, 2007 4:03 pm) yukon252 (Feb 12, 2008 8:59 pm)