Smart car as commuter

st@nners · 26 Mar 2009 at 20:42

30 MPG from a c2 furio seems abit low.

I drive a c2 VTS and get about 33 MPG around town, and at Christmas on a long run to scotland i got 42 MPG.

Archangelus · 26 Mar 2009 at 20:43

I'm not being heavy footed with it. I drive my wife's C3, which is the same engine, in the same style and get 45mpg from that. Like I said earlier, I mentioned it to the the dealers, and they had a look and couldn't find a problem with it, so I'm at a bit of a loss.

Janesy B · 26 Mar 2009 at 20:48

Hxc said:
Are you a giant? I'm 6ft and there is PLENTY of room in there. I don't even have the seat all the way back and I'm fully stretched out and comfortable. Fine on all sorts of road from experience...

Seats are supportive and alright, little hard but nothing awful.

Noisy on the motorway, I'll give you that. It's quite a bit louder than Mum's old Tigra and obviously even more so than the Jeep Grand Cherokee we have. (not comparing to the mini, not worth the words ).

Standard sound system is also woeful, but that's another story!

Haha don't get me started on that! There's no bass yet the speakers 'fart' like mad. I just find it uncomfortable, leg room was fine but I felt a little hemmed in. The car is fine for it's intended purpose bar the awful semi auto which may have been improved in later models but doing a long-ish commute in it does not sound like my idea of fun. The op would be better off with something bigger and more relaxed, not a tin box.

Hxc · 26 Mar 2009 at 20:51

The autobox is still really odd. It changes quickly if you do it manually but put it in full auto mode and it's awful! It's like the car is put into neutral for about 2 seconds before a gear is selected. Much worse than Mum's old auto tigra. She's getting used to this whole changing gear lark so there's hope yet

Janesy B · 26 Mar 2009 at 20:55

It is very poor and doesn't inspire much confidence when pulling away at roundabouts, I had to be a bit more patient as I didn't know which gear if any it wanted to give you, there's a good second or so before it gave you a hear. I found the semi-auto a bit odd and I couldn't get on with it so I was doomed with the auto

The_Dark_Side · 26 Mar 2009 at 20:57

The 'box fitted to the Smart is possibly the worst I've used.

Griffo · 26 Mar 2009 at 21:09

The_Dark_Side said:
You're either eight foot tall, or wrong.

Wrong in his opinion or just a wrong person?

I'm assuming he's not 8 foot. Oh, I was going to say "I went in one and it had space and was funny down small roads" but then I remembered that was the squashed version and Brabus'd up like your mother.

I think there must be more suitable alternatives for this type of use, regardless of whether it is cramped or crap or not?

iaind · 26 Mar 2009 at 21:19

[TW]Fox;13761882 said:
There is no way somebody who only gets 30mpg from a C2 would get 80mpg from a Smart thing.

+1

Better off with a torquey diesel, something focus/golf sized or up. Friend used to have a golf Mk4 GT TDI 130 and now a MK5 2.0 TDI 140 -doesnt drive like a grandad by any stretch of the imagination, got about 50mpg from both

Kua · 26 Mar 2009 at 21:37

merlin said:
Hi,

I hate Smart cars with a passion.

Thanks for listening.

merlin.

Aye. Honestly I started feeling physically sick when I saw this thread. But no doubt something I like makes you physically sick too. Different strokes and what not.

But seriously Smart Cars are for girls and yuppies.

-Ad- · 26 Mar 2009 at 22:37

Janesy B said:
Someone who finds S&M comfortable will find the SMART car agonising.

Thank you for the quote

Honestly, horrible cars. Silly little plastic toys with gears manned by jade goody on adrenaline.

Moeks · 26 Mar 2009 at 23:17

GeX said:
most un-informed post i've seen on here for a while, made of assumptions by an idiot

He's right though. They are nasty little tin cans, with tiny weedy little engines that need to be thrashed to within an inch of their pitiful existence to do anything. Hateful things, much like that vile Tata Nano that has been in the news of late. If you get hit or hit something in either of those you are far more likely to die than you would if you had a bit more metal around you, it's not an ill informed assumption by Duke, or anyone else, it's a blantent fact, just look at it.

Dogbreath · 26 Mar 2009 at 23:21

Janesy B said:
Come off it, you drive a mini, of course a smart is going to feel ok. I PERSONALLY felt it to be cramped, just like how I find my Fiesta cramped.

I'd go as far as to say that it's actually feels more spacious than most super minis, I'm not exactly of petite build and I felt very comfortable.

I used to think they were pretty crap little things until I drove one. They certainly aren't quick and the gearbox is pretty naff, but if you want a car purely for relatively short commutes they are excellent. Cheap or no tax depending on model, 50+ mpg (80+ for diesel), 4 star NCAP rating (if that's important to you).

Hxc · 26 Mar 2009 at 23:32

Moeks said:
He's right though. They are nasty little tin cans, with tiny weedy little engines that need to be thrashed to within an inch of their pitiful existence to do anything. Hateful things, much like that vile Tata Nano that has been in the news of late. If you get hit or hit something in either of those you are far more likely to die than you would if you had a bit more metal around you, it's not an ill informed assumption by Duke, or anyone else, it's a blantent fact, just look at it.

The Smart is really rather safe for what it is. I know it's on a TV show but Fifth gear crashed one into a concrete wall at 70mph and it held up incrediably well.

70mph is probably a fair indication of a medium speed crash, 35mph from each direction head on.

Moeks · 26 Mar 2009 at 23:39

That does surprise me to be honest. I guess it must be made of some new space-craft grade material then

...maybe that's why they are so expensive for what they are.

Janesy B · 26 Mar 2009 at 23:51

Actually the frame of the smart car is strong and rigid. Just youtube it. The problem is that the car is so rigid the trauma of the crash would kill the occupants rather than being crushed.

Moeks · 27 Mar 2009 at 00:02

Arhhh well, I guess my logic stands then. Fair enough, you don't get crushed, you just get all of your internals jolted around with such force you die anyway.

Janesy B · 27 Mar 2009 at 00:07

No room for crumple zones and the like. Another reason why it should stay in town pottering along.

Jonnycoupe · 27 Mar 2009 at 00:12

Moeks said:
Hateful things, much like that vile Tata Nano that has been in the news of late.

Have you seen Indian familys on motorbikes? The Tata Nano in the market is like driving a Volvo

Jonnycoupe · 27 Mar 2009 at 00:22

magmax said:
The 80 odd mpg was probably done in a lab and not on a real road.

Yep dyno simulation, 0-44 in 20 seconds and a few seconds at 75mph, they measure the CO2 and relate that to how much fuel would be burned to create that. Pretty crappy really.

Dogbreath · 27 Mar 2009 at 09:34

Janesy B said:
No room for crumple zones and the like. Another reason why it should stay in town pottering along.

The Smart Fortwo scores considerably better than your Fiesta in the NCAP tests, perhaps you should think twice before pottering down a motorway in it?

Jonnycoupe said:
Yep dyno simulation, 0-44 in 20 seconds and a few seconds at 75mph, they measure the CO2 and relate that to how much fuel would be burned to create that. Pretty crappy really.

It's repeatable though. It's very hard to get consistent figures from a random driver on a bit of road.