Mac Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 Need some info on Smart cars....I'm thinking about getting one for running about in. Bear in mind most of my 'running' involves central London so parking & congestion charge are important. Anyways, there seem a lot of them around for about 3k for a basic one - @ 3k they tend to have about 60k miles on them? Anyone any experience of these little fellas??? The engines are tiny so can't imagine they take the miles that well but then again I can't imagine I'd put more than 3/4k on it a year....And after a couple of years if it fell apart and I had to buy another one I can't imagine I'd be that upset? I've only just started looking so any info would be much appreciated Was thinking the 2 up thingy like the following pic - not the new coupe thingeys. Also, what about the diesels???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian_m Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 I think that the diesel ones are quite new arent they? so i dont know if you will find a diesel that cheap! This will make you laugh, but we have a Smart car at work! I have never driven it ( Thankfully! ) but I also know someone who has one and apparently they are great little cars if you spend a lot of time in the city! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac Posted January 3, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 Yeah, diesel is kind of a throw away comment as I'd just noticed they did them I've been in one quite a few times and they're cool runners for getting about. The one a guy at work has is an electric/lpg hybrid of some sort - means he can park for free BUT he's forever having to send back parking tickets as the wardens don't realise Funny thing is it's only when it's cold I start to think I need a car! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian_m Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 I dont know if I would a) buy one with 60k on the clock or b) buy one at all but I can see the purpose of them and they do make for cheap motoring at 3k! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mollox Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 Mac, If its only going to be for city driving, DO IT! I had the use of one for a couple of days and I was absolutely loving driving into work in it. Its hard to explain, I'd definitely recommend getting an extended test drive though. For me it was one of those cars that completely affects your mood and the way you drive. I didn't care for a moment that it was a 0.00006 litre or whatever, that it didn't have leather, 300 ft/lb of torque etc or that it looked so different or that it was tiny. I found myself completely buying into the "cute city car lifestyle". I was zipping about, sawing away at the wheel, diving into gaps, I even found myself grinning and laughing back at other motorists staring. It changed my whole view on driving. (Obviously its no S3 but for city-zipping, it hits the nail on the head). I tried the petrol 2 door as above. It didn't seem to consume any fuel in the 80 odd miles I did in it, and here's the ironic bit - its plenty quick enough up to 40 for commuting in London. I was quite surprised. The only things I didn't like (that much) were the slow sequential gearbox (it tends to 'think' before changing gear - although you'll love sequential) and the floor-hinged brake pedal was giving me issues as my size 10 was wedging against the panel below the steering wheel. I got used to it in no time but a couple of times it stopped my foot from pressing the brakes! (Not an issue for you mind, I bet you have tiny toots ) Try it, I think you'd really like one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busby Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 [ QUOTE ] Mac, If its only going to be for city driving, DO IT! I had the use of one for a couple of days and I was absolutely loving driving into work in it. Its hard to explain, I'd definitely recommend getting an extended test drive though. For me it was one of those cars that completely affects your mood and the way you drive. I didn't care for a moment that it was a 0.00006 litre or whatever, that it didn't have leather, 300 ft/lb of torque etc or that it looked so different or that it was tiny. I found myself completely buying into the "cute city car lifestyle". I was zipping about, sawing away at the wheel, diving into gaps, I even found myself grinning and laughing back at other motorists staring. It changed my whole view on driving. (Obviously its no S3 but for city-zipping, it hits the nail on the head). I tried the petrol 2 door as above. It didn't seem to consume any fuel in the 80 odd miles I did in it, and here's the ironic bit - its plenty quick enough up to 40 for commuting in London. I was quite surprised. The only things I didn't like (that much) were the slow sequential gearbox (it tends to 'think' before changing gear - although you'll love sequential) and the floor-hinged brake pedal was giving me issues as my size 10 was wedging against the panel below the steering wheel. I got used to it in no time but a couple of times it stopped my foot from pressing the brakes! (Not an issue for you mind, I bet you have tiny toots ) Try it, I think you'd really like one [/ QUOTE ] I can't echo this enough. I bought one just before Christmas for going to work in and it is a great little car. It does 60mpg, costs £70 to tax for the year, £120 to insure and is awesome for parking! Mine is a 52 plate Pulse with 20k on the clock and I got it from the main Smart dealer for £4000. As Mollox says the only two issues are downshifts with the gearbox and the angle of the brake pedal (bit like an old Beetle) but you get used to that pretty quickly and the drving experience is actually better than you'd think. When you are in it you really don't relaise how small it is - very clever design work! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac Posted January 3, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 Sounds like a plan then Yep it's for running into town that's all...A trip of about 7/8 miles. Thing is if you take the main A12 you get stuck in the blackwall tunnel traffic. With an ickle car like the smart you can take the cut throughs so much easier. Seems a plan is forming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loddrik Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 I'd go for a Lupo TDi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac Posted January 3, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 [ QUOTE ] I'd go for a Lupo TDi. [/ QUOTE ] Why? Tax is more, still have to pay all of congestion charge and don't get free parking? I.e. all of the things I wanted the smart for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loddrik Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 Fair enough, wasn't aware they attracted those sort of benefits, 3k would also get you a nice bike too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac Posted January 3, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 Thought about a bike but then again the only time I find myself going into town would be for: 1. Parking up and going to the pub only to collect car a few days later. Free parking indeed a bonus with this one 2. To pick up/drop off my 5 year old. Now I know she'd love going on a bike, but, well, no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 My mate bought a Smart Cabriolet. I was very sceptical until he took me out in it. A real fun little car. The only thing is he uses for commuting up and down the M11! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac Posted January 3, 2005 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 Fear that - that's what trains are for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 They look a bit vulnerable to me. A mate bought one for getting from Chertsey to the airport and is pleased with it. Is it exempt from the normal crash test stuff? If I had one I'd probably drive defensively like it was a bike rather than cut in and out which will increase your chances of a fatal side swipe. I'd be worried about getting hit by a bus/lorry/cab etc in town. Still at least you wouldn't have to worry about a coffin, they could just dig a hole in the ground and chuck the whole lot in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustynuts Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 Crash test video! Link. I'll find some more info in a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riz Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 [ QUOTE ] Still at least you wouldn't have to worry about a coffin, they could just dig a hole in the ground and chuck the whole lot in [/ QUOTE ] Riz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustynuts Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 More video links. Overhead angle view. Overhead top view. Energy dissipation. Deformation zone. Cell rigidity. Force distribution. Interior effects. Drivers side. Passenger side. The E320 they hit it with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daz Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 Fifth Gear did a crash test with one into a concrete barrier doing about 70mph and it remained in remarkable good shape. It was even possible to open the driver's door. I'm sure there was a post about it on here at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 The crash tests show it stands up very well. However if the car was made indestructable i.e. like a "Black Box" the result would be good but you'd be squished. The disadvantage of the smaller car is that you don't get the same sort of crumple zone and hence deceleration is considerably higher. In the Fifth Gear test the car did well but the passengers would still have been dead. p.s. Did anyone see the Top Gear award for understeering. It went to the Smart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RossG Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 For what its worth, i saw the results of a Smart and a Pug estate in an accidient on the motorway one morning. Can't remember exactly what seemed to have happened, but remember thinking that the Smart appeared to have come off much better I would have no problem using one - and indeed they are quite popular in Saudi - where the average Land Cruiser towers above it, and those peeps seem perfectly happy in theirs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewNiceMrMe Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 Yes, I saw this. The results were very deceptive as you say. The Smart, by virtue of its size, should not just be judged by how it looks after an accident - the passengers were at major risk. As for the TG award - I understand it won by a considerable margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustynuts Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 The space in front of the passengers is not filled with the engine, so there isn't any lump to be pushed about in the event of an accident. All the engineering goes into making the crumple zone suitable for passenger safety, rather than trying to avoid forcing the engine into the passenger safety cell. Also, as the Smart is designed as a commuter/city runabout, you wouldn't get the best protection during a motorway pileup, but at city speeds, it's going to be safe. Just don't try and compare it to a motorway cruiser type of car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewNiceMrMe Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 [ QUOTE ] Just don't try and compare it to a motorway cruiser type of car. [/ QUOTE ] I wasn't, and I agree. Personally, I'd only even begin to consider one if it were to be used exclusively within Cities and certainly not as a major carriageway car. I have been in one on the A19 - a mere dual carriageway - and frankly I was terrified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 [ QUOTE ] All the engineering goes into making the crumple zone suitable for passenger safety, rather than trying to avoid forcing the engine into the passenger safety cell. Also, as the Smart is designed as a commuter/city runabout, you wouldn't get the best protection during a motorway pileup, but at city speeds, it's going to be safe. [/ QUOTE ] I don't agree. The test 5th Gear did was a 70mpg collision into a concrete block. This is virtually (60+ vs 70) the same closing speed as two cars driving around a city. The results wouldn't be safe at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rustynuts Posted January 3, 2005 Report Share Posted January 3, 2005 [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] All the engineering goes into making the crumple zone suitable for passenger safety, rather than trying to avoid forcing the engine into the passenger safety cell. Also, as the Smart is designed as a commuter/city runabout, you wouldn't get the best protection during a motorway pileup, but at city speeds, it's going to be safe. [/ QUOTE ] I don't agree. The test 5th Gear did was a 70mpg collision into a concrete block. This is virtually (60+ vs 70) the same closing speed as two cars driving around a city. The results wouldn't be safe at all. [/ QUOTE ] Where's the crumple zone on a concrete block? Not exactly the same thing as shunting a transit up the back end, is it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now