Driver’s Logbook: Smart car makes a statement

[zwigli 0]

PETER CHENEY

Globe and Mail Update

The Smart Car reminded me of a woman I dated briefly in university – great concept, bad execution. The Smart looked perfect – a tiny, tootling urban runabout that would schlep me hither and yon with minimal impact on the environment. I like small cars, and the Smart was the ultimate small car – so short it can be parked nose-first on a downtown street.

And the Smart looked cool, with a sawed-off shape that made it even cuter than my beloved Fiat 600. So my expectations were high.

Then I drove it. Like that woman in second year, the Smart fizzled out with exceptional speed. I thought the car would be fun. It wasn’t. The steering was vague, the interior felt cheap, and the automatic transmission was the single worst piece of mechanical design I’ve encountered in a modern car – it lurched between gears like a 1980s Lada taxi.

Driving the Smart on the freeway was an exercise in terror. One hundred kilometres an hour hadn’t felt this fast since the time I lost the brakes on a bicycle going down a steep hill. The weight distribution was bad – the engine was jammed in back, an engineering afterthought that left the front end with a light, eerie feel.

Strangely enough, the Smart didn’t feel small from inside. The cabin was no different than the one in a full-sized car - unless I turned around to contemplate the Smart’s chopped-off tail section, it was easy to imagine that I was driving a Toyota Corolla.

The Smart was a social litmus test. Men in Corvettes gave me pitying looks. A woman in her late fifties hit on me at Starbucks – she had clothes that looked liked they’d been woven from hemp. The Smart was a statement vehicle, but its message wasn’t one that I wanted to convey.

As a transportation device, the Smart was brutally limited. The trunk was a miniature grotto, barely large enough for my wife's purse and a couple of bags of groceries. Taking my son to hockey was out - his equipment bag wouldn't fit. The Smart’s fuel economy was good, but not spectacular – this was a little car that punched below its weight.

Source.

[Britsmart 0]

Driving the Smart on the freeway was an exercise in terror. One hundred kilometres an hour hadn’t felt this fast since the time I lost the brakes on a bicycle going down a steep hill. The weight distribution was bad – the engine was jammed in back, an engineering afterthought that left the front end with a light, eerie feel.

That is pure garbage, unless everyone else is driving slower, usually if I am doing a 100km/h I am one of the slowest on the freeway and feels that way. If his smart car is supercharged then I can't see how that is possible, 100km/h is comfortable not an ".....exercise in terror....."One of the worst quick reports I have ever read about the smart!"Smart car..more like a coffin for dumb people. Even if the smart car was safe you still have to buy a 4x4 pickup to take you beer bottles back to the beer store and pick up more beer in the middle of a snow storm. A pickup is the only way to go..useful...plus with the double cabs and all the fancy electronics, it has lots of room and entertainment." by RustywatersYes and I love pouring $150 into my gas tank every week WOOT, lolBrit and Marty Car Edited December 21, 2010 by Britsmart

[Leadwing 565]

Even if the smart car was safe you still have to buy a 4x4 pickup to take you beer bottles back to the beer store and pick up more beer in the middle of a snow storm. A pickup is the only way to go..useful...plus with the double cabs and all the fancy electronics, it has lots of room and entertainment." by Rustywaters

That writer must have a serious drinking problem if he can't fit his empties in the smart.

[Leadwing 565]

Here's a sample of what can be put in the back before moving the seats forward. Two full sized de-humidifiers. The tailgate and rear window closed perfectly, and Spike was still able to bring all her garage sale stuff home as well.

[Speedie 4]

Engine in the back? Engineering afterthought? Gee quick someone tell Ferrari and Lamborghini they are doing it all wrong and must stick it in front to keep this twit happy! Obviously this guy is a hack rather than a car buff - guess they let anyone publish in the media now. Obviously he is not smart enough for the smart LOLCheers,Cameron

[smart142 605]

Mr. Cheney lives on another planet. Read this story how he shrugs off his son crashing a $180,000 Porsche in his garage at home.....click here.

[Leadwing 565]

It makes me wonder how this guy managed to end up writing an auto column. In one of the other links on the Globe & Mail site, he took a driving test under the watchful eye of an official examiner...AND FAILED!

Maybe he should go back to driving school and learn how to drive before passing judgement on vehicles he's not familiar with.

[ishkabibble 2]

When I read this sort of thing I often wonder what they're on. I wouldn't part with my little car for any of the others. It's great to drive and fun. Is it absolutely perfect? Probably not but there aren't many things in this world that don't involve some sort of trade off. Final words.............GROW UP!!

[deezle 0]

I'm always amazed at critics who complain about it's lack capacity for hauling stuff. Just look carefully at it from the outside and notice that it is not actually an SUV. I was always amazed at how much stuff (including countless bags of groceries) would fit in the back.I think he does have a valid point about the tranny. I honestly believe that it has been the biggest flaw in the car's design and turned off tens of thousands of buyers because of it's quirkiness.

[MikeT 744]

I don't like the gearbox much either, but it's loads better than a CVT, which I despise! With a clutch pedal, the car would be greater!

[smart142 605]

I think that everyone should be reminded that it is a STANDARD transmission with an automated clutch. It wouldn't turn away tens of thousands of buyers if that was pointed out to them before they test drove a smart car. As a standard transmission it shfits quite smoothly and quickly. And like true standard transmissions it has proved to be very reliable.I never drive in the ''automatic'' mode, I like to shift and have more control over the car.

[Leadwing 565]

I think that everyone should be reminded that it is a STANDARD transmission with an automated clutch. It wouldn't turn away tens of thousands of buyers if that was pointed out to them before they test drove a smart car. As a standard transmission it shfits quite smoothly and quickly. And like true standard transmissions it has proved to be very reliable.

I never drive in the ''automatic'' mode, I like to shift and have more control over the car.

+1

[John & Angela 16]

+1

I sucked at driving our Jeep YJ standard. The smart does a lot better job than i ever could. I almost always leave it in auto but use manual when in the hills. I use the paddles but wouldn't miss them if i didn't have them. Angela always drives hers in auto as well. Edited December 23, 2010 by John & Angela

[PrairieBoy 1]

I find that when driving on very icy roads,using the paddle shifters can result in smoother shifts,than the Áutomatic' setting.When just using Áutomatic',the car's backend wants to 'fishtail' a bit more sometimes.