Smart Car MPG in the City
 

One of the guys I work with bought a Smart Car (the Passion model) a few weeks ago. He has filled up 3 times and gotten 46, 42 and 38 mpg. The last tank was used during a time when we had a lot of snow. He does about 80% city driving, I would guess. He also doesn't utilize any techniques to increase FE, beyond simply driving the speed limit. I'll post his future mpg if anyone is interested.

Arminius -

I'm interested, especially because he isn't *trying* to get good MPG. I would love to see his "typical" MPG in high-summer. Would he be willing to participate in this? :

Welcome to Your MPG!
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=garage

Oooooooooh, look at what I just found :

2008 smart fortwo coupe
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG....rue&details=on

CarloSW2

I'll ask.

Yeah, he's aware of that.

Ok, my friend's most recent mpg was 38. I believe this mostly city driving, and he does things like taking his lunch break in his car while running the engine to say warm. :(

He said that he previously had much more highway mileage that I indicated, which would account for the higher mileage I mentioned earlier.

I almost got him to post here yesterday, but we got interrupted and I lost his attention. Perhaps I can get him to post here if I say that he wears a dress and hates the Cowboys and loves the Packers. :o If not, we'll have to assume I'm telling the truth, won't we?:thumbup:

<..>
 

That's much better then I had originally read. Actually, that's pretty good for the money. I'd love to have a car like the Smart to drive back and forth to work but it's small size frightens me. But hey, safer then a motorcyle.

mpgvalues -

I think that is the most important way to look at it. The Smart is "something between" a car and a motorcycle. Comparing it directly to a car doesn't make sense. When I drove my motorcycle, I was trading safety for convenience (parking, zipping between logjams of cars).

CarloSW2

Side impact got 5 stars. It's definitely safer than a motorcycle. Plus, you'll be able to convert it to EV when the engine dies.

Please ask how it handles in the snow.

~Thanks

Sorry, I forgot to mention that. He said that it was quite a bit better than a Ford Focus, which he used to own, which is front wheel drive. I also once spoke to a Canadian who said the same thing.

The Smart, as you probably know, is rear wheel drive.

Btw, he said he plans to post here. He (SmartCar123) has posted here in another thread once already.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/phot...rtwo_coupe.jpghttp://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:...mart_front.jpg

Yikes... I'm not sure if I like the looks of the USA smart car compared to the Canadian models :confused:. Why do things made for the USA have to look so aggressive?

Cold war strategy. :D

I find it hard to believe that little car is only getting 38-40MPG. I fully expect it to be modded to get much higher MPGs than that (unless it's really heavy).

Perhaps he should put some LRR tires on it?

He doesn't drive to save gas. I can't get him to drive much differently, but he will buy LRR tires. He said today that he was trying to coast more, but he also said that he was talking to a friend for 45 minutes in the driveway with the engine running. He takes his lunch break in his car with the engine running sometimes. YIKES!

This is what happens when young people have tooo much money.

I thought about your question, and I think I have an interesting marketing answer. There's nothing better to throw cold water on sales than to make a car that looks like a girl's car. There's a huge risk of that with that type of car.

Sunday I was standing by that car as people walked out of church. They guys tended to ask questions about mileage and safety and talked about how "cool" it looks. The gals tended to squeal over how "cute" it looks. A number of the shorter ones commented that it looks like it was made for them. Mike, the owner of the car, went past a drive-tru and a bunch of girls ran to the window to look at the "cute car." The truth is, if it looked like a girly-car a guy like Mike (like most American males) wouldn't go near it. If it looks like a guys car to the potential male customer, and it also attracts the gals, most American guys will consider the car.

Right now, I would have to say that any single guy who owns the car has a been meeting a lot of girls who wouldn't otherwise have talked to him and who don't think of him as a wimp. :cool:

The fact that this is so true, and is universally so in our culture, kills me. Why do people need to define themselves and others by their possessions?

Anyways, I've seen better mileage out of a new corolla, those figures just aren't impressive enough to warrant such a small car I don't think.

Peakster -

Are Canadian crash standards the same as the USA? I thought that Canada copied Europe. I think the USA standards are more stringent, so bumpers have to be beefier. Maybe you are getting the Euro-Smart and we are getting the reinforced bumper USA-Smart?!?!?!?!?

CarloSW2

I agree. I was going to buy a smart. I have been following them since they came out but the US has killed the car with the engine choice. Those that I've talked to were interested when they though that they could get 50-60 mpg out of it but when you're looking at 35-40 mpg with 93 octane gas it kills the deal.:( I still think it a great car it just that the US has handicap them.

US crash rating.

I'm still hoping that they will sell the electric model they are trying out in Europe.

I always thought that the Dodge Neon was an example of a car that looked cute and sold like hot-cakes. Even the Ford Tempo/Mercury Topazes might fit into that category too and they were everywhere in the 90s.

I've actually heard the exact opposite. There was a CTV news article stating that Canada is actually the one with higher bumper strength standards than the USA.

Peakster -

Ok. My info/logic is faulty.

CarloSW2

I don't know how they sell/sold, but I wouldn't say they're "girly", even if they are considered "cute" by some. I do know that I would rather drive something that looks "cool" rather than "girly" - all other things being the same.

Arminius -

I think the Neon was cute. It was even marketed that way (the "Hi" campaign).

Looking Back - Dodge Neon - Oct 7th 2005
http://www.autoblog.com/2005/10/07/l...ck-dodge-neon/
At the near end-stage of product development, they deliberately kept the oval headlights, which were part of the original concept design :

http://files.conceptcarz.com/img/dod..._neon_0_01.jpg
(I see a proto-new-beetle roofline, but that's just me)

I think Lee Iacocca or some other mucky-muck made sure that the "cute" headlights stayed. It was a paper article, so I don't know where to find it. I wish the original concept had been more faithfully rendered in the real Neon (designed to be almost 100% recyclable), but the real Neon was a nice small car.

CarloSW2

I had a smart car for a little over a year. My typical combined mileage was around 40mpg. My high for a tank was 46 in the summer on mostly flat highway. I didn't try any but the mildest of hypermiling techniques because I didn't want to confuse the servo-transimission (not accellerating to a stop sign). I think the smart with some aero mods could be a great MPG car. The thing isn't exactly aerodynamic.

I liked the car, but the family grew, so I traded it on a new Jetta sportwagen TDI.


Now, I commute in a 2007 corolla and am getting around 40 mpg with a few more hypermiling techniques. no mods yet.