Smart car safe?

The Smart car has a rear engine which minimizes any substantial crumple zone in a front-end collision. In effect, the driver and passengers are the crumple zone and if hit hard, you will not likely survive.

Gas mileage may be great, but you compromise a lot. BTW the back won't hold much more than two grocery bags - hardly enough for the family. It is supposed to be good on snow, but how about IN snow, like 4-8 inches of it? It also appears unstable if you corner it too fast.

There are plenty of better small cars out there and at much better prices. Check out Chevrolet Aveo, Pontiac Pursuit, Saturn Ion Ford Focus etc.

Reply to
hunkman7
Loading thread data ...

What a load of rubbish. An engine is NOT a crumple zone, it's in fact beneficial not to have an engine in front (engine isn't pushed into cabin in front impact) and better in terms of pedestrian safety. Smart is very safe in front impacts.

Has the fact it only seats two escaped your attention?

It is designed to understeer - all cars are unstable if you corner too fast.

Chevy / Pontiac / Saturn? Ahhh yes, quality american cars.

Reply to
Tim S Kemp

I would love to see some test data on crash worthiness of the Smart Car.

Reply to
trader4

formatting link
cf.
formatting link
?id1=3&id2=89
formatting link

Reply to
Tim S Kemp

AFAIK these tests are done against solid stationary objects. In real life there's a big risk of smashing into other cars.

When smashing into other cars the relative weight becomes very important. In a head on collision the smaller car will absorb most of the crash energy.

Unfortunately the Smart will usually be the lighter car in a crash. Pitting a 1650 kg E-class against a 750 kg Smart I think I'd put all my money on the E-class.

Ximinez

Reply to
The Spanish Inquisition

Safety ratings are only relevant to vehicles of the same weight category. For instance, a vehicle that weighs 3200 lbs is compared with a vehicle in that class and then rated. I am not sure what other vehicle would be in the same category as the Smart car, but comparatively it may come out on top. Reality is that there are Ford F150, Escalades and Silverados out there. How can ANYONE say that these vehicles are safe. I am sure any kind of side impact will result in death.

Reply to
hunkman7

Safety ratings are only relevant to vehicles of the same weight category. For instance, a vehicle that weighs 3200 lbs is compared with a vehicle in that class and then rated. I am not sure what other vehicle would be in the same category as the Smart car, but comparatively it may come out on top. Reality is that there are Ford F150, Escalades and Silverados out there. How can ANYONE say that these vehicles are safe. I am sure any kind of side impact will result in death.

Reply to
hunkman7

Weight is part of the issue - strength and the ability to absorb energy from the impact is more important. I used to own a Volvo S40, 1400kg of car. I got hit, drivers side on, 40mph by a 7.5 tonne truck. I walked away. It's been proven in many UK tests that stiff, heavy cars with ladder chassis such as the shogun and the discovery (we don't get F150s, Escalades and Silverados over here) are more likely to cause occupant injury as they transmit the impact to the occupants instead of dissipating the energy throughout the car.

Reply to
Tim S Kemp

Differn' stroke for differn' folks. It's all relative.You could get squashed by a bus while driving a SUV or you could get squashed by a Smart car while riding a motorbike. Personally, I'd like to ride a motorcycle but it's a bit too far down the roadkill chain, but a Smart is high enough. Seems like you just don't like Smart cars.

cp

Reply to
cp

So you'd never ride a motorcycle?

cp

there's a big risk of smashing into other cars.

head on collision the smaller car will absorb most

1650 kg E-class against a 750 kg Smart I think I'd
Reply to
cp

Heh, 4-stroke as opposed to 2-stroke?

Let's put it this way, the Smart was designed for a different ecosystem. Ever try piloting even a C-class down one of Europe's many small old-city roads?

But here's a "narrower" solution to the problem of getting from A to B.

formatting link

0-60 in 4s, 150mph top speed, 60"H x 39"W x 8'5"D, seats two. Drawback, it's electric, so weighs 3,057lbs.

Was tempted.

Cheers, WS

cp wrote:

by a bus while driving a SUV or you could get squashed

motorcycle but it's a bit too far down the roadkill chain,

Reply to
ws

What's that got to do anything? If you're implying the Smart has 2 stroke engine it's got a diesel.

try piloting even a C-class down one of Europe's

Yeh, I've driven C-class in Europe, at over 150mph. And what's up with the "Europe's many small old-city roads"? Where and how's that an issue? Have you ever even been to Europe?

cp

Reply to
cp

I have my license and I used to own one a long time ago. I still rent one occasionally when on holiday.

I do think that motorbikes are a lot riskier than cars. A small mistake could end up hurting you a lot more than it would driving a car. A colleague of mine drove into the back of a car recently and was hurt moderately. I think he would've walked away easily if he had been in a car.

I wouldn't want to do my daily commute on a bike.

Ximinez

Reply to
The Spanish Inquisition

engine it's got a diesel.

try piloting even a C-class down one of Europe's

"Europe's many small old-city roads"? Where and how's

There are some old-cities where this can become an issue. In small villages on hilltops in the S of France things can get really tight. In most cities and villages this is not an issue at all, although it can be advantages to have a Smart if you have limited parking space (which *is* an issue in many places). You might just be able to squeeze one more car in it...

Ximinez

Reply to
The Spanish Inquisition

No, just forgot the smiley. The OP was asking why you didn't like bikes, and many *do* come in 2-stroke.

Yes. And IMO, a Smart looks and feels "right" downtown in a city like Rome, but I probably won't drive it regularly out on the Autobahn.

Here, in Singapore, they brought in some Smarts for a trial, but the tax structure and the premium pricing meant that it was a failure. The Asian "status" mentality might have had something to do with it too.

The per-capita population of Mercs in Singapore is one of the highest in the world, IIRC, and because of urban renewal, there is no problem with roadspace, you just have to pay more for it.

In the US, with them SUVs, I'll stick with my bigger car, thanks.

Regards, WS

Reply to
ws

occasionally when on holiday.

end up hurting you a lot more than it would driving

moderately. I think he would've walked away easily

Reply to
cp

hilltops in the S of France things can get really

can be advantages to have a Smart if you have limited

squeeze one more car in it...

Yes, but it's not like the entire continent consists of tiny goat tracked villages, like some Canadians I know are wont to think.

cp

Reply to
cp

Yeh, that's what I was thinking you were implying. Actually, I wouldn't mind a bike, there's a lot of beautiful riding to be done in BC. I definitely would not commute, people here are blind to bikes.

but I probably won't drive it regularly out on the

Yeh, it is a city car.

structure and the premium pricing meant that it was a

That's too bad, a car of this size would do them good.

world, IIRC, and because of urban renewal, there is

For myself, I wouldn't mind a Smart, as a commuter car, but the price is not worth it at all. Might as well get an Toyota Echo for the daily work beat.

cp

Reply to
cp

If I had to move my family using a Smart car I would need roughly three of them. No fuel savings there...

Reply to
hunkman7

The car is an urban runabout, maybe car number 2 or 3 in a family. Never meant to be anything else.

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling

Reply to
Dori A Schmetterling

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.