The EPA rates the Smart Car’s fuel efficiency at 33 miles per gallon for city driving and 41 on the highway. Three Smart Cars with bumpers to the curb can fit in a single parallel parking spot.
Image: atianes, courtesy Flickr
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
Dear EarthTalk: I’ve suddenly been seeing a lot of those tiny “Smart Cars” around. Who makes them and what is their fuel efficiency? And I’m all for fuel efficiency, but are these cars safe?
-- David Yu, Bend, OR
Originally the brainchild of Lebanese-born entrepreneur/inventor Nicolas Hayek of Swatch watch fame, Smart Cars are designed to be small, fuel-efficient, environmentally responsible and easy to park—really the ultimate in-city vehicle. Back in 1994, Hayek and Swatch signed on with Daimler-Benz (the German maker of the venerable Mercedes line of cars) to develop the unique vehicle; in fact, the company name Smart is derived from a combination of the words Swatch, Mercedes and the word “art.”
When initial sales were slower than hoped for, Hayek and Swatch pulled out of the venture, leaving Daimler-Benz full owner (today Smart is part of Mercedes car division). Meanwhile, rising oil prices have driven up demand for Smart vehicles, and the company began selling them in the U.S. earlier this year.
Measuring just a hair over 8 feet long and less than five feet wide, the company’s flagship “ForTwo” model (named for its human carrying capacity) is about half the size of a traditional car. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rates the car’s fuel efficiency at 33 miles per gallon (mpg) for city driving and 41 mpg on the highway (although actual drivers report slightly lower results). Three ForTwos with bumpers to the curb can fit in a single parallel parking spot.
And with soaring gas prices, the cars have been selling like hotcakes in the U.S. The company’s U.S. distributor is working on importing an additional 15,000 cars before the end of 2008, as its initial order of 25,000 vehicles is almost depleted. Some four dozen Mercedes Benz dealers across the country have long waiting lists for new Smart vehicles, which sell for upwards of $12,000.
As for safety, the ForTwo did well enough in crash tests by the independent Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) to earn the group’s highest rating—five tars—thanks to the car’s steel racecar-style frame and liberal use of high-tech front and side airbags. Despite such good safety performance for such a tiny car, IIHS testers caution that larger, heavier cars are inherently safer than smaller ones.
Beyond safety concerns, some analysts bemoan the ForTwo’s price tag as unnecessarily high given what you get. The cars are not known for their handling or acceleration, although they can go 80 miles per hour if necessary. The website Treehugger.com suggests that eco-conscious consumers might do better spending their $12,000 on a conventional sub-compact or compact car, many which get equivalent if not better gas mileage not to mention likely faring better in a crash.
But for those who need a great in-city car for short errands and commutes, today’s ForTwo might be just the ticket. Environmentalists are hoping Smart will release the higher mileage diesel version of the ForTwo, which has been available in Europe for several years, in the U.S. soon. And they are keeping their fingers crossed for a hybrid version which could give the hugely successful Toyota Prius—which looks almost huge in comparison—a run for its money in terms of fuel efficiency and savings at the pump.
CONTACTS: Smart USA, www.smartusa.com; IIHS, www.iihs.org.
EarthTalk is produced by E/The Environmental Magazine. GOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTION? Send it to: EarthTalk, c/o E/The Environmental Magazine, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; submit it at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/thisweek/, or e-mail: earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php.
See what we're tweeting about
9 Comments
Add CommentOf course safety is less in a less massive car. But that doesn't mean we should all drive full cement trucks. It got 5 stars that should say it all. I was told at the GSA meeting that the average commute speed into Philly along the river was 18 mph. Which is the real key not mass. KE = 1/2 mv2. Slow = safe not mass. IMO - This is a great commuter car and if you want to be really, really safe don't get into a car at all!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thischeers - mturski
This is such a BIASED, UN-SCIENTIFIC and crappy article.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSafety is not determined by the CAR alone, but by the mix of vehicles on the roads.
In Europe, where there are mostly smaller, lighter cars injury and death rates are low.
Only in AMERICA where we have 6,000 lb behemoths do we have this issue. THE HEAVY CARS are the safety risk and the problem, exactly backwards from these spurious opinions.
Does Sci-Am work for the Auto industry?
The number of stars - 5 stars in the case of this car - is the rating determined by crashing into stationary barriers and walls. That is the equivalent of hitting another car of equal weight going the same speed. What's the chance of having a head on collision with another car, and it just happens to be another Smart Car? Next to zero. In reality, if this thing hits a 4,000LB car (whcih there are many) the chance of dying is over twice as high as the driver in the 4,000LB car. The "5 Star" rating is sooooo misleading I consider it a travesty that such a system misleads so many people. I bought a Corolla with a 5-Star rating and thought I was safe, only to discover it was only when crashing into cars of equal size. I immediately went out and bought a Ford Windstar van to replace it. While also a 5-Star rating, it was a much safer vehicle by far. Conclusion...these Smart Cars are death traps.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is the right car for certain situations.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswww.SolarPanel-Rental.com to register to get a solar system without large upfront charges, or to buy.
It's unfortunate that the truly economical Smarts, those with diesel power and light hybrid technology, are not being imported to the States. That said, the EPA numbers seem unusually low. I rented a gasoline Smart ForTwo identical to the US model in Germany, and achieved 50 mpg during mostly Autobahn driving averaging nearly 75 mph for the trip. Still, I was more impressed by the Audi A6 diesel wagon I had rented on an earlier visit. It achieved 41 mpg, in a combination of high Autobahn speeds and stop-and-go traffic. Given the price difference in Germany between the premium gasoline required by the Smart and the diesel used by the Audi, they come out nearly even.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnother un-scientific troll speaks from emotion, not science.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMy 92 Geo Metro got 48-58 mpg and only cost me $685 TTL. Sure this car looks nicer, and is probably more comfortable... but when you're talking about cost, the auto makers can do better. 33-41 mpg is nothing spectacular.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMy Smart is about 4 months old. It gives me an average 44 mpg (59 mpg in conservative suburban driving). The ride of a short light car is different than a long heavy barge, but is tolerable. When you are passed by a semi you are aware of it, but its not a white knuckle event.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you want a big heavy safe vehicle, take the bus!
We're on the list for our second Smart (even though it may take 2 years).
Detroit, PLEASE notice.
I didn't like your use of a sensational tabloid type headline. I almost waited for the "more news at 11"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this