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: graphicguy (Jun 10, 2009 6:16 am) was NOT a car that I think I'd feel safe driving.....especially on the interstate. It is a little slow in here but about the Smart car. Looks like oil/gas are on the way up again, and when that happens Smart Cars start looking better. They are made with cage construction and crumple zones, but I don't think that will help much if you collide with a transport truck or SUV. I think their real value is as a 2nd or 3rd car for small runs around town.......but then how much are you going to save? I wonder if the $4000 if you trade in your clunker will spur sales. I have a feeling that if you have an ancient clunker it won't put a new car within reach of buying 
|
|
|
Replying to: graphicguy (Jun 10, 2009 6:16 am) This was about a year ago before they started selling them. On HWY 80 between Sacramento and San Francisco, we saw a big 18 wheelers advertising SMART cars. We passed it, and in front of it were 5 or 6 SMART cards doing over 60mph. My wife and I agreed that it's not a car we'd feel safe driving on a highway. OT I wonder if that "road show"  was responsible for any SMART sales
|
|
|
Replying to: driver100 (Jun 10, 2009 6:52 am) Unfortunately, the passengers seem to be a part of the crumple zone. tidester, host SUVs and Smart Shopper
|
|
|
Replying to: tidester (Jun 10, 2009 10:24 am) No, actually, the passengers become the airbags Really though, it seems the Smart Car does reasonably well in crash tests, better than you would expect; This test shows a Smart Car going into a brick wall at 70 mph. Smart Car The Insurance Institute also found it did not too badly, though they do say a larger car will probably give you more protection; Smart Car Crash
|
|
|
Replying to: driver100 (Jun 10, 2009 1:15 pm) Maybe it was just the angle it was filmed at but that wall sure looked like it was slanted quite a bit. Still impressive.
|
|
|
Replying to: houdini1 (Jun 10, 2009 2:00 pm) Impressive, but I still wouldn't like to be in it.
|
|
|
Replying to: verdugo (Jun 10, 2009 3:09 pm) I don't think too many passengers would survive, it any car hit the wall dead on at 70mph. Very few accidents are right on. When you see how much destruction there is in that clip, just imagine two cars coming together - both going 70 mph. That would be like hitting the wall at 140! Impressive, but I still wouldn't like to be in it. See all those parts in the passenger compartment that break and come loose. Imagine bones and muscles being torn apart. That little Smart car might be safer than a lot of bigger cars, especially ones from a few years ago without airbags and crumple zones.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: driver100 (Jun 11, 2009 4:44 am) That would be equivalent to one car hitting a stationary item at 70 mph. If cars are different in mass and the other car is a larger mass the Smart car would end up being accelerated more and might even bounce backwards, giving a much larger change in velocity to its poor occupants. A problem with comparing a fixed block at 45 degrees collision with one against another car is that the parts of the cars aren't going to mesh solidly against each other, so there's going to be more intrusion in places and less slowing. Hitting the solid concrete probably uses the design of the Smart car to its maximum to absorb the forces without extreme disintegration and intrusion occuring. A real life incident is more likely to give worse-looking results. Remember that the occupants only had the time it took for the car's left front to collapse approximately 30 inch to decelerate to zero forward velocity and the approximately 25 mph sideways velocity. You can calculate an average acceleration rate using the 70 mph initial speed. That means higher deceleration rates than in a larger vehicle with a longer crush zone and longer crush time; that's better on occupants generally.
|
|
|
Replying to: imidazol97 (Jun 11, 2009 5:27 am) Wow, I forgot I am dealing with Physics experts here. Although the Smart does well in crash tests, I guess what you are saying is, in the long run, it isn't going to matter much to the occupants any way. |
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (Oct 19, 2007 3:49 pm)
|
|
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
