2008 Smart Fortwo Passion Coupe: Tell Me Why I'm Wrong

And don't forget the Smart is the only car in the world which you don't have to get out of the car to tighten the gas cap.

Check engine light is on, no problem, I'll tighten the gas cap right now!

Oh, it's cute alright - but I've known plenty of cute girls that are just like the Smart. Nice looking from a distance but start talking to them and there's NOTHIN' going on inside.

Well if you do get tired of it, they have great resale value.

Checking the local Buy and Sell, the cheapest 2005 (1st year we got them) I could find was $13,999. There were 2 more around $18K and the rest were over $20K.

Also interesting is that even though you see them everywhere here in Vancouver, there are only 8 listed for sale used. I guess the owners see more value in them then you do.

You're not wrong, but I still think the concept is a good one, and a company that already specializes in small cars could have made a much higher quality and less costly demicar. One of these days somebody will, and them smart will die but be remembered as the founding father of an entire segment.

i agree. its pointless. i'd say get a Toyota Yaris instead if penny pinching is your thing. however, same can be said for the Prius. for the premium you pay for that car over a Yaris, it'll take you a long long time to recover that money.

"You're not wrong, but I still think the concept is a good one, and a company that already specializes in small cars could have made a much higher quality and less costly demicar. One of these days somebody will, and them smart will die but be remembered as the founding father of an entire segment."

That would be the Toyota iQ, it is just around the corner.

"Even the Saturn Ion was better than this thing."

Heartless, lol.

I think the smart is a great idea, and something was lost in translation. Its a shame you don't have the diesel engine we have here in Canada, because I have heard some pretty impressive mpg numbers - more then enough to consider the car over a Yaris or a Fit.

"Oh, it's cute alright - but I've known plenty of cute girls that are just like the Smart. Nice looking from a distance but start talking to them and there's NOTHIN' going on inside."

It works the same way, the cuter anything is, the less they need to offer to make it.

People would buy the Smart even if it doesn't offer anything.

Cute girls make it thru life without having to know or do anything, some rich guy would pick them up as their trophy wife and carry them thru life.

ok, this car may suck. but there is absolutely no way i can believe that it's worse than the ion! i had an ion as a rental out in LA and it amazed me every time i got in it how god-awful it was.

wow, worse then a saturn ion. and you guys rag on staturns.

Brian, I agree 100%.

This car should cost no more than $8k for what it is. I would never buy one at ANY price, but that's another story.

So Carlisimo - you're saying the Smart is actually a Pioneer that we don't yet respect, say like an AMC Eagle or an Iszu Vehicross? Excellent company for the Smart. Interesting take.

What I find appalling is the mediocre fuel economy (on Premium fuel, no less). If this thing got 50+ mpg, you could justify someone buying it as a commuter. But low 30s for a car the size of a golf cart? Just doesn't make sense...

I, too, think the Smart's serious shortcomings could be forgiven if this thing got 50+ mpg. Take one look at it, and one just assumes that it gets incredible fuel economy. The fact that it *barely* averages higher mpgs than my 2004 Accord (not to mention any other small car in this price range) is disgraceful.

If it had a little turbo-diesel motor and a proper manual transmission, it would go a long ways towards improving both the driveability issues and crummy fuel economy...but, alas...

What a shame.

Anyone know what mpg Edmunds averaging? I checked back a ways and they haven't mentioned it in a while.

I was talking to a co-worker last week who traded 2006 diesel Smart for a new gas Smart. His mileage went from 3.5 L/100 km (67 mpg US) to 5.0 L/100 km (47 mpg US). A big drop but still way better then any Accord.

Where does the "low 30's" number come from?

We tested several fuel efficient cars, the Smart was one of them.
http://www.edmunds.com/advice/fueleconomy/articles/126370/article.html

"The added benefit of parking ease and slightly better fuel economy in NO WAY makes up for the compromises in ride comfort, handling, convenience, interior noise, flexibility and pride"

Hello, what about safety? If my wife's Avalanche met your Smart at an intersection, well, insert your own monster-truck demolition derby fantasy here. The words squish and ugh come to mind.

The Avalanche, of course, would barely register the meeting with much more than the routine >thumpthump<.

Brian

Thanks, I read that one.

I was more curious about the day to day real world average.

tinyelvis

what would happen if your wifes Avalanche met a dump truck? You'll never be the biggest on the road.

34 mpg in city driving according to the smackdown, and I'm guessing most people who drive this will be doing most of their driving around town. Remember the post where the smart was thrown around like a ragdoll on the highway...

The Smart would make a lot more sense if it get 50+ MPG average and cost less then $10k fully loaded.

"Hello, what about safety? If my wife's Avalanche met your Smart at an intersection, well, insert your own monster-truck demolition derby fantasy here. The words squish and ugh come to mind.

The Avalanche, of course, would barely register the meeting with much more than the routine >thumpthump<."

While the smart get a lot less MPG then it's size suggest, but it is also a lot more safe then it looks. The entire car is surrounded by an aluminum roll cage, do your wife's Avalanche got a build in roll cage?

I don't think the Smart is any less safe then an Avalanche.

I’m not a big Smart fan but I’ve driven one quite a bit (including a 100 mile day trip) and I thought it was fun. It gets better mileage and any of the cars you mentioned and costs less; and the size factor is not just about parking in a crowed city there are lots of times when you are driving it that being tiny an maneuverable come in handy.

@ firstwagon

Point well taken, but I respectfully submit there are a LOT more full-size pickups on the road than dump trucks. Now if the dump truck met up with the Smart.....

@ lazyhater

I don't know if the Avalanche has a built-in roll cage, but I do know it has built-in laws of physics.
Put another way, in a 30 mph head-on crash, which vehicle would you rather be in?

lazyhater,
whoa whoa, the tank truck Avalanche has all around 5/5 star crash rating WITHOUT side airbags!
The Chevy trucks are safety beasts! ...to its occupants.

Sure the Smart has a nice cage. It has such a cage because it only got 3/5 stars rollover rating. The Smart ForTwo has 4/5 star driver front, 3/5 star passenger front.
And that's crashing with merely its own weight! Not to an Avalanche which weighs more than twice as much!
http://www.safercar.gov

Absolutely nothing in the passenger vehicle market on the road beats the current Chevy trucks.
If only they got 30 mpg...

The Smart isn't any less safe than an Avalanche....
Ask the National Highway Traffic Administration's front crash wall.

Are you an environmentalist?
A Ford Focus is Bin3, Air pollution score 8/10.
A Smart ForTwo is Bin 5, Air pollution score 6/10.
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/
Ouch.

From what I understand about the passenger cell in the smart, just about any other vehicle will wrap itself around that cell.

I'm not saying the passengers in the smart will be safe, I'm just saying that the smart cell is made out of some tough shit :)

Kinda like the re-bar that Subaru puts in it's B-Pillar :)

By the way...worse than the Saturn Ion? I don't think so. No no. As my wife owned one brand new till 58,000 excruciating miles, I demand you provide proof of anything worse than that car.

Actually, i kinda miss it in the way you miss something that was totally sucky but never let you down.

Joe

"Put another way, in a 30 mph head-on crash, which vehicle would you rather be in?"

I rather be not in either one :-)

I was just saying I don't think the people in the Smart would get hurt any more then the people in the Avalanche. The size and looks of the Smart is very deceiving in many ways.

I once saw the aftermath of a wreck between a 50s pickup truck and a newish Explorer. The Explorer was pretty much totaled and flipped on its roof. The old pickup looked to have a minor dent (which may or may not have been there before the accident). The smart car would probably have been flung a few miles down the road after that collision. :)

The old trucks are great for killing everyone else. They're also great for hit and runs. Because your car would have no evidence it's ever been in a collision. If you have a chrome bumper, there wouldn't even be any paint marks.
I got hit by one before. What a drawn out insurance claim.

Well back to the Smart. It's cute.

"The smart car would probably have been flung a few miles down the road after that collision. :)"

Actually lighter weight object travel less distance with the same force apply to it.

Think if you throw a styrofoam ball and a baseball using your arm with the same force, which one go farther?

The 1800 lbs Smart would bounce away a lot less distance then a normal 3000lbs+ car after a collision.

An Avalanche is much safer than a fortwo.

the fortwo has a three star rollover rating. the avalanche has four stars.

a smart fortwo gets thrown around by a car such as a MB S-class like in the crash test video posted a few weeks back on insideline. in fact, in the said crash the car FLEW away from the MB. just think of what a truck such as an Avalanche would do.

it would punt a fortwo through the air so fast its not even funny.

@ lazyhater: No, according to Newton's Second Law, with equal force applied, the object with lower mass will be imparted with higher acceleration.

The reason a styrofoam ball travels a shorter distance than a baseball is because the styrofoam ball has a much higher surface area to mass ratio than the baseball, meaning that it's more heavily affected by air resistance. A more apt comparison is a baseball vs a lead shot.

"Actually lighter weight object travel less distance with the same force apply to it.

Think if you throw a styrofoam ball and a baseball using your arm with the same force, which one go farther?"

Wow, that is some flawed logic. Take a Tonka truck and a matchbox car and run them towards each other at equal speeds. Tell me what happens to the matchbox car after the impact.

Brian, yes, I'd say it's a pioneer. But it's too bad that Swatch teamed up with Mercedes Benz to develop it. A Swatch-Fiat or Swatch-Daihatsu combination would've resulted in better parts-bin pieces, engines, transmissions, mileage, price, etc.

The Mitsubishi i isn't as short as the smart, but it's another cute and slow microcar... with some quality to it. I'd love to see a comparo.

"Even the Saturn Ion was better than this thing."

I find it very hard to believe that the Saturn Ion was better than ANYTHING.

heal is a verb, editor.

Will you guys quit bashing the poor Ion? I've got one and I love it! It's better than almost anything my friends drive - sole exception being the '04 Mustang. The sound system's great, it gets great mileage; what the heck do you guys keep beating it down for?