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
|
Replying to: scwmcan (Apr 07, 2008 9:08 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: dunepearl (Apr 07, 2008 3:25 pm) Scott |
|
|
|
|
Well, I've never had anything flattering to say about the smart car. However, I don't necessarily want the car to fail. The "poor" safety ratings noted above aren't really all that bad. The driver side did well. What worries me, however, is the Ins Instit for Hwy Safety hasn't tested it yet--and their test is the more rigorous offset frontal impact. However, many of you have seen the recent British video of a smart car rammed into a barrier at 70mph. It came away ok. (That was not an instrumented test, however.) They shoulda made the car a foot longer. They shoulda given it more power and a genuine stick shift. They shoulda designed it to run on regular gas. They shoulda given it a killer warranty. But in the end, the car just isn't delivering on its fuel economy promise. You can only survive on being "cute" for so long before you gotta start delivering. Just ask any child star!! |
|
|
Replying to: walterquint (Apr 08, 2008 7:10 pm) Just MHO Scott
|
|
|
Replying to: walterquint (Apr 08, 2008 7:10 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: scwmcan (Apr 09, 2008 3:53 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gregg_vw (Apr 09, 2008 5:07 am) Your right about the extra foot. In europe it is Smart For Four and its been on the market for a few years.. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gregg_vw (Apr 09, 2008 5:07 am) The smart is RWD, which is necessary for superior handling. However, it's just too short and stubby to take advantage of it. It needs that extra foot. You can buy RWD wind-up cars in any dollar store. Most look remarkably like the smart car; tall and stubby. But you release them on the kitchen linoleum and they spin all over the place. That's what scares me about the smart car. The extra foot would not be for 2 extra seats. It would be for cargo and increased utility. And maybe a dog or cat carrier.
|
|
|
Replying to: walterquint (Apr 09, 2008 8:49 am) It is not a four seat subcompact. It is no more tippy than dozens of other models out there.It is a very unique conveyance with many resulting compromises. It could have used regular gas, but then the hp would be less than it already is. It could have a longer warranty, but then the car would cost more. It is the product of trade-offs, but it is another choice we didn't have just a short time ago. A lot of people would be happier with an Accent or Mini or Versa or Fit or Miata or whatever. So get whatever floats your boat. The smart's selling point is its extreme small size while still providing two people with plenty of space for commuting. You start messing with that and it is not a smart anymore. The FourFour was a bust, and probably for that reason. What's unique about yet another 4 door subcompact? |
|
|
Well I finally did it, after wanting to since they came to Canada I finally broke down and tested a smart car last night, I was hoping to test both a coupe and cab. but really only had time to test the coupe. I only tested the 450 (used diesel) because I would want the max fuel economy (even though they did have a 2008 there). I found the car to be very comfortable, There was more than adequate space inside. The ride was stiff, but not significantly worse that my Mazda (and much better than the protege 5 that we had before the 3's). I found it quite comfortable over some bad roads and did not find it overly harsh at all (perhaps because I am more comfortable with a European ride anyway (from my volvos etc.) (though of course Mike T with his peugeots would disagree on the firmness of European cars, they have a ride quality all their own). I would have to guess that complaints about the ride quality must come from those used to the more american type of ride. I found the power to be adequate and certainly not scary at all (again having started driving in old Volvos (the 140's and 240's might have something to do with that), there was certainly adequate power to at the minimum keep up with traffic (and I feel maybe more I wasn't flooring the throttle by any means). There was enough power to easily merge onto the highway as well. I would have no qualms about driving the car on my commute from St. Catharines to Stoney Creek (on the QEW) every day (and this would one of the reasons why I would purchase one). I found the car handled very well on the highway, it was stable and not overly affected by some gusting wind that was occurring at the time, and it took the off ramp at speeds that I would probably not use all the time. I have had cars that were much worse in cross winds that the smart (having been pushed into another lane by the wind when driving on the highway (the winds were extremely high at that time (and thankfully the roads empty)) I know what it feels like to be pushed around, the smart felt pretty good to me). Again I am not sure where the comments that the car is very nervous on the highway come from, to me it was not a concern at all (able to comfortably drive with on hand on the wheel (and yes I know that isn't how you are supposed to drive, it just happens). I also did not feel unsafe at all in the car, it would take a little getting used to when backing up that the car ends right at the back of the front seats, but that wouldn't take long, and would end up being an asset in my opinion. There was adequate storage and the car was well put together (it had 40,000 km on it and no rattles etc.). As for noise it was fairly loud on the outside, but I did not find it bad at all inside (my partner would disagree found it too loud inside) and if I had used the stereo would have had no problems hearing it and the engine noise would have faded away (to me at least), but since it was a test drive wanted to hear the car, we were able to have a conversation at highway speeds without raising our voices so to me not too loud at all. As for the transmission, I don't know that if it is because I have read so much about it, or because this particular car was really good, but I had absolutely no problems with it, I shifter in manual mode (no paddles unfortunately) and was able to shift smoothly and quickly without and problems from the first (the salesman was a bit surprised by this actually, said it usually takes people a little while to figure it out, maybe I'm just talented ), the only place where it hesitated at all was after I stopped on a hill and started up again, and even there I didn't think it was bad at all. All in all I was very pleased with my test, the only complaint I have is that I didn't do this last year when I bought the Mazda  would have made more sense for me to test it then, now I have to look into my finances and see if it makes any financial sense for me to get one right now, I have a feeling that I will be saving my pennies for a little while though to make it work  Again wish I had tested a smart before buying the Mazda, don't know what I was thinking (actually for some reason we had decided that we needed two cars with seating for four, can't remember the logic behind it now though, oh well, live and learn). I guess I will have to look on the bright side, if I can't buy one now, maybe the 2009's will have the diesel option again and I will be able to by a brand new smart for myself (otherwise it will be an even older by that time 450 diesel). Thanks for reading Scott
|
|
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
