Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Even the famous, urban parking scenario often doesn't apply, because most urban areas have designated spaces painted the size of a regular car.
It applies to residential parking on many Chicago side streets, that's for sure. And here metered parking on main streets no longer has designated spaces anyway.
Last edited by Irishtom29; 08-13-2012 at 11:28 AM..
I wonder, given the small population of smarts on the road, how many people use them for nothing more then "city cars" (which is their designed purpose) versus a traditional car that fills all roles including commuter, highway trips, etc. Basically, my thought is that the majority of the 40,000 smarts out there are spending most of their lives in heavily urban areas where accidents can certainly happen, but not at high speeds, hence making those accidents more survivable.
We've gone back and forth on this before, so I won't bother posting the crash testing, but straight up, frontal offset crash of a smart against a regular midsize sedan at 50mph or so, the smart is losing that battle big time and so is the person inside. It's just basic physics.
Outside of that fact, I also can't see any compelling reason to actually purchase one given the cost of the vehicle, its lack of utility (no, people cramming a SB 350 in one doesn't = utility) need for premium fuel and rather poor MPG it makes no sense versus a myriad of other similarly priced entry-level cars. Even the famous, urban parking scenario often doesn't apply, because most urban areas have designated spaces painted the size of a regular car.
I'd like to see a crash test of a Smart against a mid-size SUV and not the little weenie cars they compare it with for "class testing", and not at the 25 or 35mph they test at. Run a full speed test, 50mph+. I drive a Jeep, it weighs roughly 4600lbs, possibly a bit less. That Smart weighs what, 2000, 2500? You can cite testing data all you want, but if I t-bone a Smart at 50mph or get into an offset frontal, I'd be willing to bet money I'd come away with far less injuries than the Smart driver. If our Camry were to get hit by an SUV, I might not walk from it, but i'll most likely live.
I'd like to see a crash test of a Smart against a mid-size SUV and not the little weenie cars they compare it with for "class testing", and not at the 25 or 35mph they test at. Run a full speed test, 50mph+. I drive a Jeep, it weighs roughly 4600lbs, possibly a bit less. That Smart weighs what, 2000, 2500? You can cite testing data all you want, but if I t-bone a Smart at 50mph or get into an offset frontal, I'd be willing to bet money I'd come away with far less injuries than the Smart driver. If our Camry were to get hit by an SUV, I might not walk from it, but i'll most likely live.
I didnt' cite testing. I cited real world accident results and the fact is, in the real world, the Smart is safer than average. I don't care what you "feel" about your Jeep. In most real world cases, the Smart will simply bounce off as it doesn't have much inertia to overcome. (this is not shown in testing as the rig used to make the car move in testing also keeps it frmo bouncing off).
In the real world, for miles traveled AND per totals of car on the road, the Smart has a stellar safety record. In fact, people have walked away from crashes in Smarts where they wouldn't have had they been in average cars and SUVs.
Sometimes I feel like I'm talking to brick walls that don't want to learn anything new.
I wonder, given the small population of smarts on the road, how many people use them for nothing more then "city cars" (which is their designed purpose) versus a traditional car that fills all roles including commuter, highway trips, etc. Basically, my thought is that the majority of the 40,000 smarts out there are spending most of their lives in heavily urban areas where accidents can certainly happen, but not at high speeds, hence making those accidents more survivable.
Around here, most are used as commuters on the highway as they will with any other car. But if it is as you srumised, then peopel are driving the cars as intended and finding them, in that role, to be safer than average, which is really all that matters. Used as intended, they do quite well.
Quote:
We've gone back and forth on this before, so I won't bother posting the crash testing, but straight up, frontal offset crash of a smart against a regular midsize sedan at 50mph or so, the smart is losing that battle big time and so is the person inside. It's just basic physics.
Actually look at the rig used for crash testing that essentially keeps the cars located and not letting them actually bounce off. IN real world accidents, the lack of inertia for the Smart to overcome has allowed it to bounce off and thus have less cockpit intrusion. Even so, many of the cars iv'e owned over the years and still desire/want woudl have abbysmal crash test resutls against larger cars. Cars like my MGB and Fiat Spyder are still worthwhile to own and drive even though they only hold 2 people and have horrid crash test results. I'd still desire a classic Jaguar or Ferrari, or classic musclecar, too, even though a modern SUV would destroy them in a crash.
Quote:
Outside of that fact, I also can't see any compelling reason to actually purchase one given the cost of the vehicle, its lack of utility (no, people cramming a SB 350 in one doesn't = utility) need for premium fuel and rather poor MPG it makes no sense versus a myriad of other similarly priced entry-level cars. Even the famous, urban parking scenario often doesn't apply, because most urban areas have designated spaces painted the size of a regular car.
I'm not going to own one, I like my MINI. And I have no need of anything smaller than the Renault 4CV I have (which, at 1300lbs, makes the MINI look huge), but I won't call them stupid or dumb or any other negative appellation. Used as intended, they are perfectly safe, and quite practical (most peopel drive everywhere with just themselves in the car. if we were honest with ourselves, we'd see that anything larger than a Smart or it's ilk is a waste of space 99% of the time we are driving somehwere. If you NEED more space than that, then it's not for you, just like a 2 seat sports car would not be for you. Or if you never tow anything then a 3500 series dually would not be for you. But that doesn't make the car (or any car/truck that isn't perfect for your situation) dumb.
In the real world, for miles traveled AND per totals of car on the road, the Smart has a stellar safety record. In fact, people have walked away from crashes in Smarts where they wouldn't have had they been in average cars and SUVs.
Sometimes I feel like I'm talking to brick walls that don't want to learn anything new.
Ignorance usually is very stubborn.. Ive personally seen a Smart get literally runover by a loaded 18wheeler. He bounced off a gaurdrail while on the phone and into the path of tge trailer part of the rig and the rig drove right over it. It did 5 or 6 rolls into the median. After hitting the fuel reset we drove it onto a flatbed, with a busted windshield and a tweeked a pillar.
Not far from that wreck a couple years later a very good friend of mine (and multi Grand Am DP race winner) was killed in a head on by an innatentive teenage driver in the snow. He obviously knew how to drive and still couldn't avoid being killed in his JEEP of all things. Auto accidents have literally millions of variables and possible scenerios. Sometimes a seemigly "unsafe" vehicle might just have the attributes that will save you.. sometimes not.. Its such a crapshot and the human body is so fragile that with with such uncontrollable circumstances theres no way to predict what will be "safer" in any accident. Thinking otherwise is only good for giving you that warm fuzzy feeling. If its your time, its your time. The best bet for safety is knowing how to drive properly and to PAY ATTENTION.
It applies to residential parking on many Chicago side streets, that's for sure. And here metered parking on main streets no longer has designated spaces anyway.
It's a mixed bag and obviously city dependent. In Philly, some of the residential side streets are a free for all and the smart could come in handy. In other areas, even residential ones, the parking is all striped and designated. Same thing goes for metered spaces in the city. Also, AFAIK, no city allows "curb in" parking like they do in Europe. When I had a few in carsharing fleet we tried to get slick and stack them in a regular parking space, but that didn't work because the US versions are a little bigger then the Euro ones. Overall though, it's "smartness" is basically tied to the parking situation and using it as a city car. If you lived in Chicago and worked in the city, wouldn't just be easier to take transit and use I-Go or Zipcar for the occasional car need?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Merc63
I didnt' cite testing. I cited real world accident results and the fact is, in the real world, the Smart is safer than average. I don't care what you "feel" about your Jeep. In most real world cases, the Smart will simply bounce off as it doesn't have much inertia to overcome. (this is not shown in testing as the rig used to make the car move in testing also keeps it frmo bouncing off).
In the real world, for miles traveled AND per totals of car on the road, the Smart has a stellar safety record. In fact, people have walked away from crashes in Smarts where they wouldn't have had they been in average cars and SUVs.
Sometimes I feel like I'm talking to brick walls that don't want to learn anything new.
Merc, the "bouncing" is what makes the smart more dangerous for the occupants then a regular car. You end up getting two extreme forces, one for the deceleration on the initial impact and then the "whiplash" effect of the car being knocked backwards. The smart safety cage is strong and doesn't allow much penetration in most cases, but the car also has no crumple zones to dissipate the kinetic energy from an impact. All of that force essentially gets transmitted into the passenger compartment, because it has nowhere else to go.
We keep beating the same horse, but here's the IIHS test again: IIHS news release
Quote:
Laws of physics prevail: The Honda Fit, Smart Fortwo, and Toyota Yaris are good performers in the Institute's frontal offset barrier test, but all three are poor performers in the frontal collisions with midsize cars. These results reflect the laws of the physical universe, specifically principles related to force and distance.
Although the physics of frontal car crashes usually are described in terms of what happens to the vehicles, injuries depend on the forces that act on the occupants, and these forces are affected by two key physical factors. One is the weight of a crashing vehicle, which determines how much its velocity will change during impact. The greater the change, the greater the forces on the people inside and the higher the injury risk. The second factor is vehicle size, specifically the distance from the front of a vehicle to its occupant compartment. The longer this is, the lower the forces on the occupants.
Size and weight affect injury likelihood in all kinds of crashes. In a collision involving two vehicles that differ in size and weight, the people in the smaller, lighter vehicle will be at a disadvantage. The bigger, heavier vehicle will push the smaller, lighter one backward during the impact. This means there will be less force on the occupants of the heavier vehicle and more on the people in the lighter vehicle. Greater force means greater risk, so the likelihood of injury goes up in the smaller, lighter vehicle.
As far as the smarts current fatality record, like I said earlier, I imagine that has more to do with the fact that most of them spend their days tooling around urban areas at low speeds where crashes aren't as catastrophic. FWIW, one can die or be seriously injured in any accident regardless of the car/truck/SUV being driven. The safety standards that are tested are what the engineers design for. Even a little deviance from that in a real world crash can result in a catastrophic collision versus walking away unharmed. Still though, on average you are safer in a larger car.
As far as the smarts current fatality record, like I said earlier, I imagine that has more to do with the fact that most of them spend their days tooling around urban areas at low speeds where crashes aren't as catastrophic. FWIW, one can die or be seriously injured in any accident regardless of the car/truck/SUV being driven. The safety standards that are tested are what the engineers design for. Even a little deviance from that in a real world crash can result in a catastrophic collision versus walking away unharmed. Still though, on average you are safer in a larger car.
That is consistent with my observation albeit for a limited area. We see quite a few SMarts tooling around on local streets, but virtually never on the freeway. I probably see at least one smart a day on local streets. I have seen one on the freeway since they came out.
The boucing around is not the biggest problem, it is the resultant effect of your brain sloshing around inside your skull and smashing repeatedly against the sides that would concern me.
Otherwise, bouncing around like you were inside a ping pong ball might be fun.
That is consistent with my observation albeit for a limited area. We see quite a few SMarts tooling around on local streets, but virtually never on the freeway. I probably see at least one smart a day on local streets. I have seen one on the freeway since they came out.
The boucing around is not the biggest problem, it is the resultant effect of your brain sloshing around inside your skull and smashing repeatedly against the sides that would concern me.
Otherwise, bouncing around like you were inside a ping pong ball might be fun.
I think I've seen one, maybe two on the highway here in VA. I see them every so often around town. The only one I remember seeing on the highway was in the right lane going 15 under the speed limit (65), but that could be taken any number of ways. DC bought the Mayor one, I think he only drove it a few times.
I don't think so. An American without a car is like a Comanche without a horse.
Don't be so sure, I had a friend that lived in NY for 2 years...she left her car here in VA - never needed it. There's a trend amongst some people to ditch the cars and go "green". I'll keep my car lol.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
