Author Topic: Why Smartcar? (Read 19662 times)

Sergeant Bob · « **Reply #25 on:** April 30, 2008, 09:37:11 AM »

Quote from: Manedwolf on April 30, 2008, 07:00:02 AM

This will score no women other than the sort that wear Che shirts, are unshaven and reek of patchouli.

Man. If cars had soundtracks, that one would have a single kazoo.

Hey, that's about the size of a coffin! undecided

Manedwolf · « **Reply #26 on:** April 30, 2008, 09:40:53 AM »

Quote from: Firethorn on April 30, 2008, 07:08:05 AM

Oh, did anybody else catch that you need to feed this thing premium? 91 octane minimum. I beleive that the civic, yaris and such can all take regular.

All Honda engines are designed for 87 octane.

Gewehr98 · « **Reply #27 on:** April 30, 2008, 09:46:49 AM »

My wife is thinking about trading in her Elantra for a Pontiac Vibe or the Toyota Matrix, since they're both the same car.

A local college kid bought our old 32" Sony TV via Craigslist, and the big monstrosity fit quite nicely in his Vibe, with room to spare.

It kinda reminded me of my old Ford Fiesta (German Ford, not the Korean Festiva) and the amount of interior space that little car delivered.

I'd like to find another early Fiesta, they did well in SCCA, too.

Regarding octane, if they bump compression to increase efficiency and horsepower from small-displacement mills, you'll see more cars requiring the higher-octane fuel. Everything old is new again.

Marvin Dao · « **Reply #28 on:** April 30, 2008, 10:14:06 AM »

Quote from: Manedwolf on April 30, 2008, 08:40:53 AM

Quote from: Firethorn on April 30, 2008, 07:08:05 AM

Oh, did anybody else catch that you need to feed this thing premium? 91 octane minimum. I beleive that the civic, yaris and such can all take regular.

All Honda engines are designed for 87 octane.

There are exceptions. The K20A3 in the current Civic Si is a 91 octane only engine. Same for the F20C1/F22C1 in the S2000. Both can run on 87 octane as a stop gap, but there are severe performance penalties. The Acura line up also features engines that require 91 octane.

Iain · « **Reply #29 on:** April 30, 2008, 10:28:35 AM »

chris - the smart does have an established manufacturer, it was at least in part a mercedes project. I would rather have a citroen c2 with the 1.4 diesel - gets something in the sixties mpg iirc.

Headless Thompson Gunner · « **Reply #30 on:** April 30, 2008, 10:45:31 AM »

Quote from: Sergeant Bob on April 30, 2008, 08:37:11 AM

Quote from: Manedwolf on April 30, 2008, 07:00:02 AM

This will score no women other than the sort that wear Che shirts, are unshaven and reek of patchouli.

Man. If cars had soundtracks, that one would have a single kazoo.

Hey, that's about the size of a coffin! undecided

I saw a Smartcar for the first time last week. It was tooling down the interstate at 70mph between two semis. "Deathtrap" was my first thought. My second thought was "idjit".

The Annoyed Man · « **Reply #31 on:** April 30, 2008, 10:50:21 AM »

Quote

I saw a Smartcar for the first time last week. It was tooling down the interstate at 70mph between two semis. "Deathtrap" was my first thought. My second thought was "idjit".

Yeah, because Lord knows nobody ever dies in 12mpg bigazz SUV rollovers. rolleyes

mtnbkr · « **Reply #32 on:** April 30, 2008, 10:51:00 AM »

Probably safer than a motorcycle in the same situation. If this is the same car I saw in the crash test videos last year, it doesn't appear to be terribly unsafe.

Chris

Headless Thompson Gunner · « **Reply #33 on:** April 30, 2008, 11:56:11 AM »

Quote from: Paddy on April 30, 2008, 09:50:21 AM

Quote

I saw a Smartcar for the first time last week. It was tooling down the interstate at 70mph between two semis. "Deathtrap" was my first thought. My second thought was "idjit".

Yeah, because Lord knows nobody ever dies in 12mpg bigazz SUV rollovers. rolleyes

I'll take a 4,500 pound SUV over a 1,600 pound Smartcar any day. 12MPG is a small price to pay for safety.

Bogie · « **Reply #34 on:** April 30, 2008, 11:57:51 AM »

Jen sent me one of those circulating e-mails a little while back. Some guy in a smart had been hit by a truck.

Pretty much ground guy below his shoulders... Rather disgusting.

I'd get one, however, for advertising value (I'd wrap it with graphics), or for exclusive city use.

charby · « **Reply #35 on:** April 30, 2008, 12:35:51 PM »

Quote from: Headless Thompson Gunner on April 30, 2008, 10:56:11 AM

Quote from: Paddy on April 30, 2008, 09:50:21 AM

Quote

I saw a Smartcar for the first time last week. It was tooling down the interstate at 70mph between two semis. "Deathtrap" was my first thought. My second thought was "idjit".

Yeah, because Lord knows nobody ever dies in 12mpg bigazz SUV rollovers. rolleyes

I'll take a 4,500 pound SUV over a 1,600 pound Smartcar any day. 12MPG is a small price to pay for safety.

...well unless some cheap alternative hydrocarbon is produced I have a feeling we all will be driving tiny little vehicles.

Boomhauer · « **Reply #36 on:** April 30, 2008, 12:47:18 PM »

I've seen a couple of smart cars.

No way would I call it smart. No way would I drive one, either. Pretty fugly.

Tallpine · « **Reply #37 on:** April 30, 2008, 01:00:13 PM »

Does that thing have an engine, or pedals Huh?

Harold Tuttle · « **Reply #38 on:** April 30, 2008, 01:10:31 PM »

one cool thing about the smart is the body panels are plastic and a complete set are only $800

heres the 70mph smart crash into a wall:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s

bedlamite · « **Reply #39 on:** April 30, 2008, 01:41:26 PM »

This is the only reason I could think of to get a Smartcar, and it has nothing to do with efficiency.

Boomhauer · « **Reply #40 on:** April 30, 2008, 02:15:12 PM »

Quote

Does that thing have an engine, or pedals

It comes standard with a hyperactive hamster in a wheel.

K Frame · « **Reply #41 on:** April 30, 2008, 02:38:19 PM »

Take a look at this crash test result...

Focus on the dummy driver's head and the dashboard.

I'd say it's a complete failure...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F06LjugtIUo&feature=related

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #42 on:** April 30, 2008, 02:45:16 PM »

I think it was somebody on this board that quipped, "Hey, it could be a shuttlecraft for my truck!"

Declaration Day · « **Reply #43 on:** April 30, 2008, 02:57:24 PM »

Quote from: Mike Irwin on April 30, 2008, 01:38:19 PM

Take a look at this crash test result...

Focus on the dummy driver's head and the dashboard.

I'd say it's a complete failure...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F06LjugtIUo&feature=related

Ummm, that's a Chinese Brilliance BS6.

Sergeant Bob · « **Reply #44 on:** April 30, 2008, 03:12:39 PM »

I watched those Chinese crash test videos as well. They all fold up like a cheap suit.

lupinus · « **Reply #45 on:** April 30, 2008, 04:10:06 PM »

smart car?

I've had cars with engines bigger then the smart car....

K Frame · « **Reply #46 on:** April 30, 2008, 04:33:47 PM »

Yes, I know it's a Chinese car.

That's why I posted it... juxtaposition.

charby · « **Reply #47 on:** April 30, 2008, 04:55:04 PM »

Quote from: Mike Irwin on April 30, 2008, 03:33:47 PM

Yes, I know it's a Chinese car.

That's why I posted it... juxtaposition.

You and your five dollar words, simply prodigious.

Gewehr98 · « **Reply #48 on:** April 30, 2008, 06:35:06 PM »

Crash test blah-blah-blah. That little 4-wheel cage is still safer than my motorcycle, and lots of us risk that mode of transportation every day... undecided

Bogie · « **Reply #49 on:** April 30, 2008, 06:50:40 PM »

That's because cagers just look for other cagers - How small can a car get before it quits looking like a car?

News:

Author Topic: Why Smartcar? (Read 19662 times)