Smart Roadster

The_Dark_Side said:
2 seats, RWD, open top...that's for starters.

care to reconsider that statement?
Click to expand...




Traction engines have two seats and are rear wheel drive and are open top.

Try again.
 
Last edited:
wow, so much hate, criticism and hard words.

I hope that all of you car experts and critics are putting your knowledge to good use in the real world.

And to the poster who said he would smash one up. You get a free: :rolleyes:
 
The_Dark_Side said:
So educate us all on the precise remit of a 2 seater sportster.
Click to expand...

Quick, sharp handling, good looking, raw or classy dependant on what you are looking for, it should make you feel special.

The smart roadster is slow, buzzy, ugly, cramped and the gear change near enough ruins what little enjoyment there is to driving it, its unreliable (which if it was a fun car to drive you could live with) and it leaks like a sieve and it makes you feel ripped off.

Sort the gear change, put a proper engine in it, change how it looks, make it a bit bigger and make the cabin waterproof and you have a great decent priced two seater roadster.................. called a mazda mx5.

And Mr Murry agrees with me which is why he is totally redigning the smart Roadster.
If it is anything like its current incarnation when he is finished i'll eat my trousers (i dont wear hats)
 
Last edited:
atpbx said:
Quick, sharp handling, good looking, raw or classy dependant on what you are looking for, it should make you feel special.
Click to expand...
You do realise that you've just decided that roadster type cars have only really been produced in the last 20 years or so.
Take the MGB, by your definition it's not a roadster.
It's 2 seconds slower to 60, has worse build quality, is less reliable and doesn't handle as well as the Smart...yet it's one of the most popular and most loved of the British roadsters.

To say that the Smart roadster fulfils none of the remit of a roadster is just plain old fashioned wrong. The MX 5 for example is no beauty. It might have raised the bar for roadsters to be judged by but it's still very Japanese in its appearance. only with the last couple of facelifts has it begun to look tasteful.

A roadster/speedster needs RWD, 2 seats and to be roofless. the Smart has these characteristics.
You say it's cramped but have you been in one?
As "buzzy" isn't in the dictionary i can't really dispute its meaning.
You say they leak like a sieve, which is incorrect. there are leak issues but it doesn't occur on all of them.
 
Just to chip in again on the Smart. As mentioned, I really liked it, and with a better engine and a normal gearbox, would be a seriously interesting option.
Having said all of that, I'd still rather have the engine at the front of the car.

As for it's packaging, pretty much like a mk3 MR2. The MR2 has no boot at all, and the boot space in the Smart it roughly on par with the cubby holes behind the seats in the MR2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom