smart cars

[expat]

Quote:jcwit You have a point Quattro, problem is the idiots don't get the point. I can just see someone on the Dan Ryan or Kennedy in one of those sardine cans. But then again if its rush hour you're only doing a max of 20/30 anyway, unless you're on the far ends.

Given a choice, I would not take one on long Freeway trip, anymore than I would want to drive a full sized car in a City downtown. It doesn't mean the car is not capable if you wish to do that.
See the crash sequence at 70mph, the cars are capable of freeway speed, and they are hardly sardine cans!
I really find it fascinating that some people here have what appears to be Disdain for this type of car! What is it?
is it un-American to drive something that small?

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts
Many people park as well as they drive.


Good one !

 

[labman]

Originally Posted By: simple_gifts


Many people park as well as they drive.


I have long felt vehicle size should be proportional to the drivers skill. Those unable to center what they are driving in a parking space should be compelled to drive something smaller.

Some people would end up on roller skates.

 

[jcwit]

Originally Posted By: expat
Quote:jcwit You have a point Quattro, problem is the idiots don't get the point. I can just see someone on the Dan Ryan or Kennedy in one of those sardine cans. But then again if its rush hour you're only doing a max of 20/30 anyway, unless you're on the far ends.

Given a choice, I would not take one on long Freeway trip, anymore than I would want to drive a full sized car in a City downtown. It doesn't mean the car is not capable if you wish to do that.
See the crash sequence at 70mph, the cars are capable of freeway speed, and they are hardly sardine cans!
I really find it fascinating that some people here have what appears to be Disdain for this type of car! What is it?
is it un-American to drive something that small?



No its not un-american, its not smart.

Here in No. Indiana we also have Amish buggy's traveling down a major U.S. highway. Also not to smart, one of those and a semi ends the buggy, people and usually the horse. Smart??? car and semi, very ????????????

Just don't see any safety factor being as the crush zone is my kneecap to my crotch.

 

[labman]

Under Pennsylvania law, the Amish buggies are non moving objects. You hit one and it's your fault.

 

[ps49556n]

Smart cars to me at least have a very limited target market...in many european citys where the streets are tiny they are great...in a city like New York they are REALLY great as you can literally park them as you would a motorcycle... other than that they really aren't all that practical for most people.

 

[jcwit]

Originally Posted By: labman
Under Pennsylvania law, the Amish buggies are non moving objects. You hit one and it's your fault.


That may all be, bet it sure helps the folks inside the buggy when they get hit. Dead is dead, no matter what the "law".

 

[expat]

Quote:jcwit

Just don't see any safety factor being as the crush zone is my kneecap to my crotch.
[/quote]

Did you see the Smart Crash video?

Did you see the (Old) F150 Video?

What's your take om Motorcycles?

 

[LS2JSTS]

Look, you cant get away from physics. The other manufacturers already went through a phase where they thought building the strongest possible cage would be a safe vehicle, it isn't. What they found was, that if the cage around the passengers was too strong it just made the occupants bounce around inside the cage. The vehicle didnt absorb enough of the crash energy. A strong cage around the ocupants, especially with no crush zone to speak of is the worst possible scenario at high speeds.

If that 70 mph collision had a dummy in it, you would see the effect on the passenger. Because the car and cage itself survives the crash is meaningless in discussing what would happen to a human bady in that same crash.

 

[expat]

O.K. I found this:


In all my internet and news searches, I can only find 3 Smart Car Deaths listed for the USA from January 2008 to today. Thus, the real world data says that the actual number of deaths is a bit more than 1/2 the average expected deaths. This strongly says that in the real world, the Smart Car's safety systems do exactly as advertised; the car is safer than the average car.

On the other hand, if the real world data had shown 8 or 9 deaths, twice as many as expected, the logical conclusion would be that those who call the car a "Death Trap" would have support from the results.

The only know deaths in the USA to date are:

Union County, NC: July 2009; 81-year-old Donald Dixon ran a stop sign, hit by minivan
Smart car driver killed in Union County, NC - WIS News 10 - Columbia, South Carolina |
http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=10818724

MIAMI, FL: March 28, 2009; 62-year old Raonel Tapanes collided with a Honda Civic; the Civic's driver also died in the crash.
Crash Victim's Family Shares Grief As 'Mini' Results Released - Automotive News Story - WPLG Miami
http://www.justnews.com/automotive/19185352/detail.html

Arielle Krause, passed away July 2, 2009 in Houston, Texas after a tragic (Smart Car) accident.
http://www.hcnonline.com/articles/2009/07/...5ccg1516701.txt


Even with more conservative numbers, the current count of 3 deaths is still less than the estimate of 4 or 5 deaths. The FARS data for 2009 does not come out until next year and the count of the current deaths is based on finding any news accounts of Smart Car deaths. (Something the news media loves to cover.) Once we have the updated data from FARS, we'll be able to see if my count was correct. We do know from the FARS data that the number of Smart Car deaths for 2008 was ZERO.

When dealing with single digit results, there is some question as to if this is really normal or shifted due to the random nature of events. Thus, the result of 3 deaths is likely to be +/- 1. It's not impossible to be +/- 2, but it's less likely.

If the car is a "Death Trap" one could argue that in 2008, due to dumb luck we had zero deaths. However, as 2009 is in the final months, 2009 is showing a low number of deaths too. The Smart Car is just not showing the pattern of a "Death Trap".
[End Quote.]

Now I have to say, I believe that these stats are proberbly LOW because the Smarts 'natural' environment is a City, where Fender Benders are more the norm than high speed Freeway crashes.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Totally agree, at City commute speeds and around town I dont see any problem driving one of these. My only concern is in a high speed collision.

The Smart 70 mph video even acknowledges that a driver in that wreck would be "very unlikely" to survive. So the Smart cage survives but you dont?....So what.

 

[jcwit]

Originally Posted By: expat
Quote:jcwit

Just don't see any safety factor being as the crush zone is my kneecap to my crotch.


Did you see the Smart Crash video?

Did you see the (Old) F150 Video?

What's your take om Motorcycles?

Whats my take on the video? Didn't watch it, don't need to, you trying to say I'm supposed to trust the government?

Did I see the (old) F150 Video? Nope, see above answer. Never owned one anyway.

Whats my take on Motorcycles? Well, motorcycle versus car/truck/semi? Death waiting to happen, not to hard to figure out.

There, you wanted my opinions, you got em.
[/quote]

 

[labman]

expat presents some interesting information.

1 Yes, statistical data is quite unreliable in groups of less than 30.

2 Urban areas are heavy on fender benders with no injuries.

3 You need to look at demographics. Who would buy a smart car? Who drives say an F-150 or a Crown Vic? My guess is that the Smart car buyer is going to be younger, more likely to fasten their seat belt, less likely to be drunk, less likely to grossly exceed the speed limit, likely to drive fewer than average miles, and some other factors reducing the chances of of being killed in an accident.

4 I suspect the chances of dying in an auto accident are more strongly influenced by how you drive than what you drive.

5 With air bags and fastened seatbelts, you shouldn't be bouncing around the cage that much.

 

[expat]

Originally Posted By: jcwit
Originally Posted By: expat
Quote:jcwit

Just don't see any safety factor being as the crush zone is my kneecap to my crotch.


Did you see the Smart Crash video?

Did you see the (Old) F150 Video?

What's your take om Motorcycles?

Whats my take on the video? Didn't watch it, don't need to, you trying to say I'm supposed to trust the government?

Did I see the (old) F150 Video? Nope, see above answer. Never owned one anyway.

Whats my take on Motorcycles? Well, motorcycle versus car/truck/semi? Death waiting to happen, not to hard to figure out.

There, you wanted my opinions, you got em.
[/quote]

Okeedokee!
But you proberbly would read this;
http://chicksontheright.com/2009/04/22/ncpa-says-guns-dont-kill-people-smart-cars-kill-people/

 

[jcwit]

Nope didn't read that either. Chicks on the right??

Just sticking to my opinion, and using something that is seriously lacking in todays liberal world, COMMON SENSE.

I see the link says guns don't kill people how true as none in my collection of a few hundred has killed anyone to the best of my knowledge. However I'm not sure about my WWI Krag, or Springfield, or my WWII Garand, or .30 cal Carbine, or my WWII German Mauser or Japanse Arisaka, or German P-38 ect., ect.
I'll have to ask them.

 

[jcwit]

Man can't even abbreviate the name of a country.
OK no more U.S. its now United States.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: labman


5 With air bags and fastened seatbelts, you shouldn't be bouncing around the cage that much.


Could you clarify, at what speed this would/should hold true. At 30 mph, I tend to agree with you. At freeway speed, I think the trauma to the body would be severe. Head/neck and internal injuries galore.

 

[LS2JSTS]

I do believe this....

"The fact about the ForTwo is simple - there just aren't enough of them driving around right now to determine what actually happens. Far fewer of them have been in serious accidents. However... "In the 40-mile-per-hour frontal collision into a stationary barrier, Institute president Adrian Lund stated "We recorded a high head acceleration when the driver dummy's head hit the steering wheel through the front airbag." For responders, his indicates that the institute's test dummy used up all of the available ride down room in the Smart's seatbelt system and interior space as the crash occurred."

The test dummy hit the steering wheel THROUGH the airbag in a 40 MPH crash test. 'the crash test engineers also noted that during the collision, the driver's door unlatched. This also occurred during side-impact crash testing conducted by the NHTSA."

 

[Cutehumor]

that midsize car vs smart car was crazy. smart car got tossed like a ragdoll. anyone got a suburban vs smart, hummer vs smart, or Ford F350 vs smart.

 

[expat]

The smart has been in production for 12 years, total sales #'s are over 3/4 million, nowhere have I seen evidence that Death or injury rates are higher than other cars.
Again: a Jeep, a Ford Super Duty, a Corvette a Smart. each is designed for use in a different environment, I have no use for one, but I could understand the advantages if I were still working in London or San Francisco (But I really don't care much for the version the U.S. is getting!).
Apparently, in Europe, the general public were just as astounded when Smart type vehicles started to appear on the streets in the 1990's, it seems they are over than now, I guess in time, Americans will become accustomed to 'non traditional' vehicles as they become 'Allowed'
Strange thing, in the 'Land of the Free and the home of the brave', you are happy that the Government dictates what cars/trucks can and cannot purchase

Heck, if I want to buy an ultra small car that saves fuel, and poses less danger in a collision to other road users, you would think the average driver would be all for it