"Buddy" car

[kody]

This is a car I saw in Oslo, Norway just a couple days ago and wanted to share it with the club.

[kody]

Another view

[Foxy]

I'd rock it for my commuter car :)

[DontPassTheFence]

I dunno how id feel driving a matchbox/lego cross over car :lol:

Id like to turbo it though and see it fly

[Woofer]

these are the new cars we have here


http://www.thesmart.ca/site/smartnew/images/content/grandstyle_728_en.jpg

[ga5speed02]

i love the smart car, i want one so badly

[99GrandAMSE]

... cute but to me, they're about as unsafe as the Smart car :lol:

[XoticGA]

No... thanks..

[Foxy]

Smart cars (and other, tiny, modern cars) are pretty safe. It's a pretty common misconception that larger = safer. The engineers paid a lot of time and effort into making these small cars safe, even when crash tested against larger vehicles.

I'd much rather be hit by another car in a smart car than a motorcycle ;)

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/040820/040820_smartcrash1.standard.jpg

[levey]

Originally posted by Foxy
Smart cars (and other, tiny, modern cars) are pretty safe. It's a pretty common misconception that larger = safer. The engineers paid a lot of time and effort into making these small cars safe, even when crash tested against larger vehicles.

I'd much rather be hit by another car in a smart car than a motorcycle ;)

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/040820/040820_smartcrash1.standard.jpg

That was gonna be my next piont. How can North American drivers shit on these small cars (safety I mean)...when cycles are obviously the un-safe vehicles on the road? Surely.....you would rather be in a car like like this in an accident?

[99GrandAMSE]

Originally posted by Foxy
Smart cars (and other, tiny, modern cars) are pretty safe. It's a pretty common misconception that larger = safer. The engineers paid a lot of time and effort into making these small cars safe, even when crash tested against larger vehicles.

I'd much rather be hit by another car in a smart car than a motorcycle ;)

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/040820/040820_smartcrash1.standard.jpg

I don't consider it a misconception :) ... I have seen several "videos" showing the outcome of what happens when these little death traps get hit and even though they may appear at first glance to be OK, take a look at where the front end is after a head on ... larger doesn't always equal safer, no, but it certaingly is logical the more room and material you have around you the better your chances are for lessened injuries most of the time ... this crap about "they simply bounce off" is garbage because while it is true the car might actually "bouce", the damage to the vehicle and occupant after the "bounce" is what bothers me ... sometimes, sure bulk equals walking away as opposed to being carried away :(

[Foxy]

Kelly,

There's a pretty big debate. Obviously, as a compact car driver, I have a biased view of how unsafe SUV's are, and that people who drive them have a "screw the rest of the world" attitude.

Still, studies do show that you are more likely to be killed in an SUV than a compact car (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/17/business/17auto.html?ex=1250481600&en=ab39f99261bb8c6e&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland). I think (but don't know for sure) that the ladder-frame type SUV's and big trucks may transmit more forces to the passenger compartment since they are so stiff; a unibody can absorb the energy instead.

The front end may look smashed in in the videos, but they're designed to do that - crush in to dissipate energy, and push the engine underneath the passenger compartment. These small cars (Smart, Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris, etc) are essentially roll cages with wheels and body panels. The passenger area is untouched - look at the crash tests (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-755537514509842927&q=crash+test&pl=true). The green car, larger than the Smart, has an obviously tweaked frame, and the door pops open. The Smart car's passenger area is intact and unbent.

Keep in mind that metal around you would be irrelevant if you can avoid the accident in the first place.. and I'd rather be scooting about in something that can handle than a land barge.

I know that it's a common (primarily American) attitude that small = death trap, but after looking at the engineering that's gone into, say, the Honda Fit in particular, I'd feel safe in one of these small cars.

And I'd still rather be in a Smart car than on a motorcycle if I crash ;)

[rabidpanda69]

Comparing a motorcycle and a car in crash test is useless. thats like comparing a dingy and a yacht in the middle of the ocean. Obviously the car is going to be better.

But to be on topic, I dont care how economical, or even how safe that thing is. It's just too ugly for me to drive :lol:

[spike4881]

The smart car was developed and owned by Mercedes Benz, so I'm pretty sure they aren't the "death traps" you make them to be. Wasn't there a video some one showed about the aftermath of a smart car accident? IIRC its safety was impressive.

Besides, remember it is a *commuter* car - it's not something you're going to throw the family in for a trip to BC.

['96GAGT]

:lol: @ Smart car Im no small person... You might as well put one seat in that thing.. and put the steering wheel in the middle.. then I'd consider driving it.

[glockyman]

After living with a family in Germany that owned one, I'd have to say, they're not all they're cracked up to be. There was a sports coupe version that they built over there for a while, and when I remarked on something that light being pretty fast, I was told that its got piss-poor acceleration, handling, and top speed. They compared the Smart to the old Trabi (look it up if you don't know what a Trabi is), and we only drove in the Smart twice, and used the Passat wagon the rest of the time.

Speaking of which, I didnt even know a Passat could hit 160 mph. The tuning must be different there.:D

[Foxy]

I'm not sure what you were expecting out of a car with .6 liters of displacement and 145 width tires and a cd of .37...

All of these microcars fill a very specific niche (that is, fuel-efficient motoring in dense urban areas). Don't be surprised if you try to use it outside of those parameters and it falls on its face...

[glockyman]

Originally posted by Foxy
I'm not sure what you were expecting out of a car with .6 liters of displacement and 145 width tires and a cd of .37...

All of these microcars fill a very specific niche (that is, fuel-efficient motoring in dense urban areas). Don't be surprised if you try to use it outside of those parameters and it falls on its face...

With the original Smart, you're right. But when it comes to the sports coupe, I was expecting a little more. The styling was pretty cool, but it just wasn't a bit better than the original. I guess thats why they stopped making it.

[gerald]

geez with a car that tiny you never have to worry about parking spots being too tight.

[Crew97]

I don't really believe that car needs side mirrors, seeing that all you have to do is turn your head and you can pretty much see if there is a car there or not.

[Nighthawk243]

Originally posted by Foxy
Kelly,

There's a pretty big debate. Obviously, as a compact car driver, I have a biased view of how unsafe SUV's are, and that people who drive them have a "screw the rest of the world" attitude.

Still, studies do show that you are more likely to be killed in an SUV than a compact car (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/17/business/17auto.html?ex=1250481600&en=ab39f99261bb8c6e&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland). I think (but don't know for sure) that the ladder-frame type SUV's and big trucks may transmit more forces to the passenger compartment since they are so stiff; a unibody can absorb the energy instead.



I think the reason for the chances of death is because of the roll-over rate. Truck/SUV type vehicles have a larger Center of Gravity, meaning that they'll roll... Usually in a rollover, your airbags will not do much to help you, and your seatbelts are not nearly as effective (Both systems for the most part are designed for the standard frontal impact hits, not roll-overs). Plus, in a roll-over accident, you are more likely to be thrown from the vehicle should you not be restrained. Getting ejected out of a rolling SUV is not only bad for the fact that you're just getting thrown, but also because you have a pretty good chance of being crushed by the rolling vehicle.

[b2089]

SUV's are deathtraps for MANY reasons but it always comes down to chance and the driver. SUVs have a much higher accident rate in inclement weather for instance. Many drivers seem to think 4 wheel drive and a big vehicle will make them impervious to ice. There's also the small but very existent X factor, people who try to drive over mountains and through rivers. I remember a video of a Jeep getting washed into the ocean because the driver thought he drive through the edge of the water.

As for the SMART car, we're getting it in the US within a year or so. I'm anxious to see how much it costs. If the fuel economy is good and the price low I may consider trying for one. I've always thought the US needs a real commuter car. I'd like to see a one seater even since many people drive alone back and forth to work.

[1CoopGT03]

Originally posted by kody
Another view
Oh Look a Yogo gave birth ! :lol: