DaimlerChrysler to Bring Teeny Two-Seater to U.S.

That little two passenger death trap ought to sell well against all of the
four passenger, $10,000 to $12,000, cars available in the US. LOL


mike hunt

 

yeah, we europeans never have had a big vehicle in our lives.

Heck, I went and looked up the same vehicles on the europNCAP rating,
and on safercar.gov - Every vehicle that was on both scored much
higher in the US ratings than the EU ones - maybe EU cars are safer,
or at least rated more stringently.So, just as a supposition, if a
vehicle was that dangerous, it wouldn't be allowed in the EU, and oh,
thats where the SMARTs been for many years now.

 

The Focus is described as a semicompact car. This size of vehicle is at
the price sweet spot in the United States.

I'm aware of both of these vehicles, but we're talking about the Smart
here. It is going to be expensive and what are you going to get for
this money? A compact car will be a much better buy.

It will also probably be gasoline here, as US diesel fuel standards
preclude the use of domestic European-market diesel engines.

 

Just think of it as a stylish Gator or a motorcycle with training wheels,
then the driver and passenger can feel safe.

 

The problem with a limited crumple zone is that the vehicle has to be much
more rigid to minimize intrusion or deformation of the passenger
compartment. Designing a passenger compartment that does not deform at 40
mph is not as difficult as designing a passenger restraint system that does
not transmit all of the crash forces to the occupants, like a falling
elevator.

For example, you could put someone inside a padded safe, and push it out a
4th floor window and let it hit the ground. The safe may be structurally
sound, but the occupant is mushed inside.

 

true, but the way that f150 deformed, it didn't absorb much impact,
/and/ mushed the occupants by intrusion - the worst of both worlds.

personally, as a guy that like to surf junkyards from time to time, i've
taken the trouble to examine a fair number of wrecks. i'll take the
vehicle that doesn't allow intrusion any day thanks very much - i'll
take my chances on the effects of being punted around inside.

 

My mid-sized Honda Accord gets gas mileage that's almost on par with Focus,
Cobalt, and even Aveo. So it makes no sense to compare those cars to the
fuel-stingy Yaris and Fit.

Considering that this is a DamnYourCrapsler product, I don't expect it to be
all that reliable.

 

I saw a bunch of these earlier this year in Germany. They're smaller
than you can imagine. Take a MINI and chop off a third of it. They
also are higher and narrower in profile. I think you might get a paper
grocery bag in the trunk area width-wise. I think they're only good
for driving around cities; I'd be afraid of driving over 50 MPH in one
of those.

 

These things are all over the place here in Vancouver - the Smart cars
have been available here for a couple years now, and they've become
popular to the point that city councilors are being encouraged to
introduce special parking rates for them (you can fit two into a
standard parking space).

You don't see them so much outside the metropolitan areas - they're much
better suited for commuting and just running around town, than to long
highway drives.

 

Ahhhhhh... no. 140mph head on and the F1 car explodes. But, that's the
design intent. The only thing that escapes is the driver's tub. If a car
did not dissipate the energy the driver would. Chances of survival in a
140mph head on impact which only crushed 8-10" of a car would be quite low.

 

Now that's a cool hobby. And so peaceful...

Y'know, they make SUCH a BIG deal about "crumple zones". The term even
makes it into advertisements. The NHTSA makes dramatic videos (vividly
displayed in automaker adverts) showing the effect of such "crumple zones".
The idea of the "crumple zone" is that the energy of the impact will be
*slowly* absorbed, so that Mrs. PorkPie's internal organs won't suffer
G-forces sufficient to extrude their liquid contents into her minivan's
cupholders and kill her.

Now -- get this -- all of a sudden, the "Smart" car does not have to have
"crumple zones"! Somehow, it will violate all the laws of physics while
protecting its occupants! Instead of slowly converting impact energy into
deformation, the "Smart" is "bounced around like a pinball", so all the
energy is dissipated in bouncing the car around. But wait..you're IN that
car...

Transport Canada rigged frontal impact tests for 1998 model year cars to
make sure automakers would have to install airbags without having the
threat of legislation forcing them to do so. At the time of this occurrence
(around 1996), a major bureaucrat boasted that TC had done this. This
avoided the need for a vote in Parliament. I think the "Smart" benefited
from that sort of rigging, and that this particular "rigging" was done in
order to allow the introduction of the sort of car the commie pinkos liked.

Canada requires (and is the ONLY country that does so) that bumpers be able
to absorb the forces of a 5 mph impact into a fixed object without damaging
the car's "safety" systems". Well, have you ever looked at an actual
"Smart" car? The only reason the lighting system is protected from damage
is because it is quite high up, almost at windshield level. The wheels and
suspension...hmmm...There is a 5mm layer of plastic between intruding
objects and the tires and nothing else. Is that "safe"? The slightest bump,
and your steering goes...

Seems to me that Daimler Chrysler have tugged at the enviro/safety
heartstrings of the powers-that-be, and have convinced them that something
as expensive and demonstrative as the "Smart" MUST be a Good Thing.
Therefore the "Smart" should achieve certification for Canadian roads on
account of its moral goodness, and nothing else. Seems like US lawmakers
are now similarly in thrall to this nonsense.

My suspicion as to why the "Smart" shows low collision and injury rates?
Because nobody under the age of 50 drives one. Nobody under the age of 50
can AFFORD one. 50-year-olds have collision rates far below those of
younger drivers.

Forty inches between your steering wheel and the front bumper. Think about
that. Go measure it against your own car. Go sit in a "Smart" once they
become available, and think for yourself.

Smart is stupid.

 

well, /i/ like it. i'm just a grease monkey.

crumple zones are definitely useful, but the truth is, many cars'
crumple zones "activate" at speeds well below that necessary to prevent
serious injury. it's a /fantastic/ mechanism for ensuring vibrant
health of motor manufacturers and local body shops however.
particularly when they're arranged such that the body shell becomes
irreparable or seriously expensive at say 6mph. "fix or repair daily"
are /experts/ in this. their initial deformation zones are usually
/behind/ the engine, not in front!!! that's BIG $$$$'s and it's hardly
enough of a slam to have even spilled your frappa-latta-mocha-chino.

to be honest, i've not seen this particular vehicle up close - it's a
long time since i've been to europe or canadia, but i seriously doubt it
has no crumple zones. the important thing is that it has a sufficiently
strong passenger cell.

that used to be the case here in the states, but you can bet your sweet
little rear end that the auto and repair industries scotched that pdq
once they felt the bleak wind of dramatically fewer repairs/write-offs
blowing around their sensitive parts. which they did for a few years in
the 70's.

they would be if they weren't much more enthralled at the, er,
"contributions" that big oil still lavishly slops around the d.c. area.
do /not/ misunderestimate the impact this has on current nhtsa policy.

maybe, but a responsive nimble car probably has something to do with it
too. in addition, if it's lighter, there's less energy to absorb.

energy = force x distance moved. for a given impact, if the force
necessary to deform a crumple zone is low, it needs a larger deformation
distance over which to absorb that energy. provided the deceleration
rate does not exceed that which causes injury, and with seat belts and
air bags, it's a lot higher than it used to be, there's no reason to
have large scale deformation if more limited deformation does the job.

come on tegger, don't be bashful - how do you /really/ feel?!!!

 

Quite sure it is! However, I would submit that you haven't sussed my
personal agenda in this case, so I will state it so you can comprehend! My
personal agenda was to point out how flawed the study was that was cited. It
was an evalutation of the sources cited. That and nothing more!

Dave D

 

There is some information about construction if you click on "why are they
safe"
http://www.zapworld.com/cars/smartcar.asp#

Click on the MSNBC link or go directly here to see a crash test
http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?g=486fca78-0f3a-40db-aed8-7b1d97e08a61&

 

Yes, I noticed that. Europeans seems to use cars for transporting people
only. Busses and trains, more people. Trucks, large and small, seem to
move everything else.
Been there (Rome, Gaeta, Marseilles, Toulon, Palma de Mallorca, Cannes,
Antalya, Naples, Livorno, and many I don't remember that well) on
liberty/furlough, Navy recently retired here. Lot of em just walk to the
local market for daily foodstuffs if they live in town. Spanish seem the
most likely to walk in western Europe.
Live in rural S. central Texas. Need a vehicle to go into some town for
groceries etc. that is friendly on gas. Local grocer is very pricey
compared to big supermarkets selling same size/brand foodstuffs. Local Ace
hardware (franchise) is similar in their prices. Unless its a lotta items
or a few expensive ones, its not worth driving elsewhere. My Blazer S-10 is
okay for comfort, but my VW wagon is the one I usually use.
My opinion regarding very small engine displacement vehicles is that they
should be given a break regarding pollution standards here in U.S. Imported
or not. Not saying they should be immune entirely, just less stringent.
Maybe pollutants per mile standard, say around 1.8L or smaller engine?

 

Maybe so but here in California, every now and then, someone starts
talking about putting standards on lawn mowers. Never seems to get
legs. Must be the dreaded lawn keepers lobbyist's.

 

They apparently use your skeleton in lue of crumple zones


mike hunt

 

They say that is a great place to find a lot of the parts one needs for
their Toyotas.

mike hunt

 

I read in a auto magazine about DaimlerChrysler "BLUE TECH" engines that are
a hybrid diesel that should get some impressive MPG's when they hit the us
shores pretty soon. Daimler has been selling them in Europe for some time
now and is about to start using these high tech motors in U.S. cars soon. I
like my Honda but these new DC sound mighty impressive.