(Shouts to Mysterious Mimir for the eye catching SMART shot)
CNNMoney.com managed to put together one of the most level headed reviews (from a practicality standpoint) of the SMART. Well, it started out nice… they didn’t really say anything that most hadn’t already figured out; it’s cute, easy to park, etc. , etc. and then they gave it the smack-down and said it handled like a 3-cylindered turd. Not exactly in those words, but they weren’t that far off. I’m still one to say that “car handling is all a matter of opinion”. A scooterist reviewing it from a scooter point of view might say it handles like a great little 999cc, 4-stroke, 4-wheeled, two-passenger, roofed scooter where someone reviewing it like a car (against the likes of Mercedes or BMW) might say it handles like an over priced, under featured, urban city hipster-mobile that runs on turtle turds… (did I just use that word twice in one post? Hrm… I’m outta practice). I still like the SMART, but also welcome more competition.
So again… If you’re considering dropping a hefty wad ($14,000) on a 2-wheeler and you’re not looking for a vehicle to boost your masculinity, you might consider a 4-wheeler like the SMART. It’s about as practical as a touring bike and will draw more eyes than an exhibitionist at Disney World.
And as for safety, it can’t be any less safe than THIS:
Click on the title link to read the whole story according to the stodgy old CNN dude. Hehe, I kid. Though I do wonder about his approval of the H3. Thanks to Scotty B for the scoopage!
27. February 2008 at 12:40 am
I enjoyed your article on the Smart car. I agreed with your assessment on two schools of opinion – a two wheeler and the far reaching end of the upper-Lux category expectations of a 4 wheeler driver. Not many nor one that drives a 550 Benz going to say nice things even to a Cadillac STS. Your article on this Smart opinion is very clear.
27. February 2008 at 4:34 pm
A lot of handling is personal opinion and subject to trade-offs. You have to trade ride quality for corner carving or acceleration for economy. It’s just how the physics works. Just because it isn’t to your taste doesn’t make it wrong.
But there are objective standards. You do not want a car that over-steers badly. You especially don’t want a car that over-steers and under-steers unpredictably. The Smart and Prius are in the last group. That is bad handling by any objective measure.
27. February 2008 at 6:25 pm
I don’t mind about bumps and what not. My 79 P200E has nothing to speak in the way of suspension. But once I saw that 24 month , 24000 mile warranty I froze. Esp with a transmission that has to be specifically built for the smart.
Plus I felt like this reviewer from CNN was trying to bash the car. Granted it won’t span many potholes, but still you can say he wants to find something bad about it. Also the whole “safer in a bigger car / Suv” is ****. The onyl reason it passes crash ratings is because most crashes happen around the drivers feet. Also look at the european show Top Gear. They crash a smart and show you everything. It did well.
27. February 2008 at 8:18 pm
I found the smart to be a huge disappointment (and I had ponied up the 99 bucks early on). Mainly, I expect something 8.5 feet long and 1600 lbs. to feel light and nimble, and the smart does not. I also found the autoshifting manual transmission slow to respond and quite abrupt in shifting (why not a CVT?). Going around a tight corner is like being spun on the end of a rope. And really, 40 mpg? I used to have a ’98 Honda Civic that got 44 on the highway.
Just about anything in the B segment (Aveo, Fit, Yaris) will do as well on gas mileage, and give you more for the same money. Unless you really need for your car to be less than 9 feet long…
27. February 2008 at 9:19 pm
Pvino! I’m glad you see where I was coming from. Thanks for the comment.
JTB! I suppose that’s the problem with short-wheelbase cars. I saw this crazy VW on Top Gear last night and saw very clearly how small + powerful = not necessarily a good combination. Thanks for the comment.
Anon! Yeah, 24 months leaves Mercedes with very little skin in the game. I hope it out performs such a scant warranty. I also agree that it was pretty shady of the guy to pull the “Big = Safe” card. What a tool. He’ll have us all in Sherman Tanks with that kinda BS. Thank you for the comment.
Orin old friend! Good to see you back. Your comments are fair. I’m not sure wassup with their idea to skip CVT for what they’ve got. Fuel economy? I dunno.
I’m a fan of those B Segment cars myself as well. The only thing REALLY cool about a sub 9ft car is the sweet curb parking.
I wonder how the old Isetta or Messerschmitt performed in comparison. Anyone wanna do a head to head? Thanks for the comment Orin!