TheSamba.com :: View topic

Fri Jun 20, 2008 12:48 pm

I've started to see those little Smart Cars on the road so I went online to check them out. They cost around $25,000, and get 33 city and 41 highway mpg and only seats two people. I guess what I don't get is that my wife paid about $18,000 for a Toyota Matrix, it seats 4 comfortably and 5 if you have to, has plenty of luggage room, and get's about 35 mpg highway. So how is a Smart Car "smart"? Am I missing something?

Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:03 pm

Well, one obvious advantage would be the Smart car's small size, particularly for people who live in large cities and urban areas. It would have to make parking easier.

As for the mileage, the only fair comparison would be to compare the Matrix's EPA rating to the Smart's. Remember that that EPA changed the way MPG ratings are calculated in 2008 to reflect more "real-world" scenarios, like running the AC, stop-and-go traffic, etc. With that in mind, the Smart is rated 33/41 and the base 2009 Matrix is rated 26/32.

Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:10 pm

atmellovw wrote: I've started to see those little Smart Cars on the road so I went online to check them out. They cost around $25,000, and get 33 city and 41 highway mpg and only seats two people. I guess what I don't get is that my wife paid about $18,000 for a Toyota Matrix, it seats 4 comfortably and 5 if you have to, has plenty of luggage room, and get's about 35 mpg highway. So how is a Smart Car "smart"? Am I missing something?

ummm- 25K? - no they don't I have a cabriolet on order and it's around $17.5 - (minus the rediculous comfort package of heated seats.. :roll: )

edit- actually it's $16,5K - just looked at my reservation paperwork

Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:13 pm

Somethings wrong if there hasn't be much improvement (MPG wise) in 20 years.
1989 Honda CRX HF:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/5263.shtml

Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:15 pm

atmellovw wrote: So how is a Smart Car "smart"? Am I missing something?

They had to call it the Smart. They couldn't make any sales if they called it the Silly!

Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:22 pm

IIRC, the Smart they are selling in the US is a gasoline version. The Diesel version gets much better mileage but they won't sell that one in the US.

Considering that my wife's Scion xB gets 30 actual MPG in town and 35 on the highway while seating 4 adults in comfort I don't think that I'll be buying a Smart soon.

Fri Jun 20, 2008 1:38 pm

Word to the wise -- the SMART car cannot handle high winds. I live in Oklahoma, which is well known for strong winds that last for days. One of the people at my local liquor store owns a SMART. A few weeks ago, when it was very windy (we're talking 35+mph winds), I had stopped in to purchase some adult beverages and I asked him where his "Tinker Toy" was. He responded that he barely made it 4 miles from home and discovered that the little car is uncontrollable in very windy weather.

Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:04 pm

///Mink wrote: Well, one obvious advantage would be the Smart car's small size, particularly for people who live in large cities and urban areas. It would have to make parking easier.

As for the mileage, the only fair comparison would be to compare the Matrix's EPA rating to the Smart's. Remember that that EPA changed the way MPG ratings are calculated in 2008 to reflect more "real-world" scenarios, like running the AC, stop-and-go traffic, etc. With that in mind, the Smart is rated 33/41 and the base 2009 Matrix is rated 26/32.

They are also required to run on premium.

I love the major automotive companies that offer 2.99 gas but when you read the small print it's only for 87 octane. Do they sell a car that they say will run at peak performance on 87?

Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:06 pm

That diesel Smart car is nice! I had an Italian buddy who owned one, and I'll be damned if he couldn't park the thing sideways, and it still didn't stick out into the street! Damn fine car in the city, but I don't doubt it sucks in the wind. :shock:

Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:09 pm

Okay, according to Edmunds, they range from $11.5K to $17.5K (I looked at Ebay initially). I guess I thought they would get better gas mileage. Thank God we have the EPA to tell us to calculate MPG since it is such a complex math problem! :D They do look like a blast to drive though...

Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:17 pm

Vintage Split wrote: Somethings wrong if there hasn't be much improvement (MPG wise) in 20 years.
1989 Honda CRX HF:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/5263.shtml

True enough, but emissions limits have made it harder to get that kind of mpg and still run clean.

The Prius, for all it's mpg reputation, was invented at the time of $1 gas, and was done for low emissions. It just happens that hybrid technology means the gas engine is run so much more efficiently that pollution, as well as consumption, are drastically reduced. It is a side benefit to get the high mileage, and now a major one with $5 gas.

Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:53 pm

Hybrids also only get peak economy at specific speeds, and guess how many blissfully ignorant consumers acutally use the technology installed in these vehicles to save gas? :roll:

Here's a good artical about how to save the most with a Prius.
http://www.kbtoyota.com/priusmileage.html

I seriously doubt there is a majority who drive hydrids as they were designed to be driven, because I get passed by Prius lunkheads all the time doing 75mph. Guess how much they're saving? None, because at that point it's all the gas engine!

Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:10 pm

crofty wrote:
They are also required to run on premium.

I love the major automotive companies that offer 2.99 gas but when you read the small print it's only for 87 octane. Do they sell a car that they say will run at peak performance on 87?

My ACVW's will run on 87 octane. But I run them on 89.5 because it is cheaper.

Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:17 pm

Russ Wolfe wrote: crofty wrote:
They are also required to run on premium.

I love the major automotive companies that offer 2.99 gas but when you read the small print it's only for 87 octane. Do they sell a car that they say will run at peak performance on 87?

My ACVW's will run on 87 octane. But I run them on 89.5 because it is cheaper.

Me too but a new car rated for 87? From Chrysler or GM?

Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:22 pm

miniman82 wrote: Hybrids also only get peak economy at specific speeds, and guess how many blissfully ignorant consumers acutally use the technology installed in these vehicles to save gas? :roll:

_Any_ vehicle will get peak economy at a specific speed! Nothing special about the Prius there!

The main advantage to the Prius is that when you press on the brake pedal most of the kinetic energy of the vehicle is stored rather than used in heating up the friction brakes. The stored energy can be used to re-accelerate the vehicle making such stops more efficient.

There is little advantage to a hybrid when it is being driven at constant speed.

The reason for the rather outrageous EPA mileage claims is that much of the energy being used by the car during the city driving cycle was actually stored in the batteries before the cycle began. Since the EPA determines fuel used by measuring the emissions of the vehicle (really!) the energy drawn from the batteries doesn't count as fuel used!

Whether Toyota intentionally designed the Prius to use this flaw in the EPA test procedure to inflate its "official" mileage figures is left as a exercise for the reader.

The Smart car comes by its economy by a more honest method, light weight. However, it cannot do much about the laws of aerodynamics unless drivers are willing to ride in a prone position.

Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:33 pm

KTPhil wrote:
The Prius, for all it's mpg reputation, was invented at the time of $1 gas, and was done for low emissions. It just happens that hybrid technology means the gas engine is run so much more efficiently that pollution, as well as consumption, are drastically reduced. It is a side benefit to get the high mileage, and now a major one with $5 gas.

Thank you. No one seems to understand that. It would be interesting to see Toyota take the gloves off and actually design a hybrid for balls-out fuel mileage, but the Prius isn't that car. It was designed for super low emissions, and fuel mileage is just an afterthought. In fact, a lot of what happens under the hood actually hurts fuel mileage-- for example, the engine runs far more than required, especially right after start-up and in city driving just to keep the catalytic converter good and hot.

Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:37 pm

That's a little overstated to say there is a "free energy" store used to cheat the EPA tests. In fact, the gas engine will recharge the battery as needed, and whether there is more or less in the battery after the EPA test varies and is not always in the car's favor for the tests.

A Prius will probably be more efficient even at a constant speed because of it's variable valve timing and also the continuously variable transmission, so the gas engine is always operating in the most efficient rpm at any given speed. It will use the electric motor to either bleed off excess to the battery for use later, or draw from the battery to supplement the gas engine for short times. It really is a system, not just an "either gas or electricity" system, hence Toyota's rather pretentious name of "Hybrid Synergy Drive."

However, as posted, at higher and higher speeds, the "trade space" for electric and gas shrinks until it is basically operating as a conventional gas engined car somewhere around 80-85mph. I drive 75 on the freeway because if I go slower I get run over by SUVs and impatient commuters and soccer moms. It's a matter of survival. As a result, I "only" get about 44-45mpg, whereas friends that stay off the freeways routinely get about 55, consistent with the old EPA ratings.

I'm all for a 55-60mph limit on freeways (I'll go for more on open rural highways) both for my own mpg in the Prius and for the comfort and safety on my VW.

Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:46 pm

Icy wrote: Word to the wise -- the SMART car cannot handle high winds. I live in Oklahoma, which is well known for strong winds that last for days. One of the people at my local liquor store owns a SMART. A few weeks ago, when it was very windy (we're talking 35+mph winds), I had stopped in to purchase some adult beverages and I asked him where his "Tinker Toy" was. He responded that he barely made it 4 miles from home and discovered that the little car is uncontrollable in very windy weather.

my 71 super isn't much better! i was changing lanes like a motherfucker last week, whether i wanted to or not!

Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:48 pm

KTPhil wrote: As a result, I "only" get about 44-45mpg, whereas friends that stay off the freeways routinely get about 55, consistent with the old EPA ratings.

That's exactly what I get in my 2005. 44-45 on the Interstate at 75 , but if I'm on a two lane where I can set the cruise at control at 62 and just go, I can get 56 all day long. No car can overcome the laws of physics, and speed has a cost.

Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:48 pm

It's sad that none of these new 'green cars' can beat a 20-30 year old diesel MK1 for MPG.