Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Hatchbacks Smart Car Smart Fortwo
491 messages, Last post on Oct 07, 2009 at 6:46 AM
You are in the Smart Car Forum. Your Host is pf_flyer
|
Just my 2 cents -- profits CAN affect function in this way: If you'd bought a Daewoo a few years back, you'll have an increasingly difficult time finding spare parts and knowledgeable service. That said, I already own two cars (well, right now four, but two are up for sale) and when they are available I plan to purchase a Smart cabriolet just for kicks. My youngest child will be in preschool and the Smart will be an excellent vehicle for me to have fun in, run errands, go to the store, etc. when I'm by myself. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: datlila (Mar 03, 2007 11:21 am) If its low enough in price and gets good mileage (which it is supposed to do in both) I am game for it. |
|
|
I can think of several reasons to own this vehicle. But, I must admit, I'm very confuesed. They say it will come in around 40 miles to a gallon? What happened. I used to own an AMC/REAULT Alliance. It was advertised at 53 miles per gallon and frankly, it measured that way all the way to 133,000 miles - when I drove it overheated and broke it. If they could do that in 1987 - with a four seater - why can't we get 70 mpg with a two seater in 2007 (20 years later)? -very curious about this. |
|
|
|
| I saw the Smarte in Ireland back in 1999 and really like it then. I think it has a useful purpose in the USA. I also think it's cute. I'm sorry it's being sold through the Mercedes dealers. That could mean expensive service. It would seem that an economy car like this would sell better though Chrysler dealers. | |
|
|
|
Replying to: stowite (Mar 03, 2007 3:39 pm) Come on now, an AMC/Reault Alliance couldn't go 53 miles.  FWIW the Alliance was EPA rated at 41 highway and 34 city at best per the EPAs website. If they could do that in 1987 - with a four seater - why can't we get 70 mpg with a two seater in 2007 (20 years later)? -very curious about this. A couple of things. First is that there is only so much energy in a gallon of gas and it takes so much energy to move a pound a certain distance. Even if the engine was 100% efficent there is only so far a car will go on a gallon of gas and no further. Secondly there is something called the law of diminishing returns. That basically says every increment is harder to achieve and more costly. In other words its faster, easier and cheaper to increase a cars mileage from 35MPG to 36MP than it is to increase it from 36MPG to 37MPG.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: stowite (Mar 03, 2007 3:39 pm) So can I its so versatile.     And my personal favorite: 
|
|
|
Replying to: snakeweasel (Mar 05, 2007 6:10 pm) |
|
|
The tank needs a turret, though. Of course, being Smart-Sized, maybe a couple of side-mounted gatling guns.
|
|
| smartusa.com just posted some initial pricing for the US smart fortwo. Pure will start under $12k, Passion under $14k, and Passion Cabrio under $17k. I am thinking about getting the Cabrio. It seems like a fun car for Southern California. | |
|
Currently have a BMW 325i 4-door that I'm going to keep. I'm going to look at this as a 2nd car. I've test-driven the Prius twice and the Honda Civic Hybrid twice. Both of them are almost double the price of the smart, for one thing. The Prius is impossible to see out the back of (one reason why they have highly recommended the backup camera - I would have nightmares about running over somebody's toddler), not to mention it drives like a sack of potatoes. The Civic Hybrid drives better, but gets only slightly better mileage than the regular Civic for a lot more money. So, what to do... I would like a second car for a) splitting the mileage with the BMW; b) running errands around town, and c) parking at the bus stop. Oh, and to get better gas mileage than the Bimmer. For the same money I could buy a used Beetle or a used Mini... but this comes with a lot of nice features standard for the money. I'll have to give it a test drive when it gets here. I really wish we had some other smart options, such as the electric version (altho you still have to think about where your electricity is coming from -- coal, for instance, not a very clean option. I happen to be on nuclear power here, which has its own set of issues.) It's too bad they're deleting the roadster, which I've seen on the U.K. site, that might fly very well over here in the U.S. As far as safety I think it's as good as a Mini. Definitely better than a motorcycle! Here in the land of (yawn) SUV-mania, anything you drive that's smaller than a tank is likely to be the loser in a battle with one of those things. However, I think smart has done as good a job as they can and probably more than most people expect for the size of car it is. So before I settle on something I'll give the smart a test drive - after it's been around for a few months to see how things are going. Momma didn't raise no fool. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Hatchbacks Smart Car Smart Fortwo
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 smart fortwo
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
