What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

daysailer

Obviously. But why?

beantown

Because:

they can
image/peer acceptance
cost (I can get a new '07 Camry LE or Sonata right now for the same price as a lesser-equpped Yaris)
amenities
less harsh ride (right or wrong, more Americans want this)
safety (real or perceived)
real world gas mileage isn't noticeably better in today's subcompacts compared to their compact counterparts (some are even worse)

Any one of the other subjective items discussed in the last 200 pages....

Mr_Shiftright

I'm not understanding the logic of that decision either... I mean, prices being equal, parking being equal, and gas prices where they are now, why would a person pay the same amount of money (or even more) for a cramped buzzy little thing with 60 hp and 0-60 in 15 seconds that carries no luggage and only one other person, when for the same price (or actually less) you could get a car that goes 0-60 in 9 seconds, with 13 cubic feet of luggage space, 106 HP, 39 mpg, 150 inches long and weighing 2,200 lbs?

What possible advantage could there be given the conditions for the comparison except some pocket change in gas savings?

Or to put my question another way, why might a person, pay the same price for the smaller of two houses side by side?

Or to put it a third way, would YOU want to be the salesman pitching the micro given the circumstances outlined, that is, current gas prices and competitive (non-subsidized) parking?

snakeweasel

Its a poor question because all the variables are not equal.

Mr_Shiftright

So --- a once in a while parking space and $200 a year gas savings for half the power, half the room and more money than a Yaris?

That's what I'm buying here?

No thanks.

snakeweasel

Sure they are, relatively speaking

No they are not, prices of cars are rarely equal. While the price of gas is the same how much gas each individual car uses a different amount to go the same distance.

I am pretty sure the acquisition cost and gas cost is much cheaper in a $11K Smart than a $15K Civic.

daysailer

Shifty, you have referenced disadvantages that were excluded by my comment (e.g performance). I said that , all other things equal, I would pay a premium for smaller size/less mass.

And the house analogy doesn't fit either - a house is not mobile and has very different considerations (excluding size as an extension of ego) but I might still choose the smaller one, if it was as large as I needed. An unnecessarily large house requires more expense and effort in maintenance and its principle advantage is resale value. In fact, I downsized my house and property several years ago (at increased capital outlay) in order to reduce maintenance. Resale value of a vehicle is not a priority for me since I keep vehicles long term.

I don't need a visible display of property, mobile or otherwise, to establish my sense of self-worth.

bobw3

Pretty interesting posts. I guess I'm in the minority too. Based on the discussion, it sounds like people here live in those totally ugly development sprouting up where they have a huge house set on a tiny lot with a 3 car garage (one single, one double door) in the front taking up the entire width of the front "lawn." They need the double garage door because they can't fit their huge car through a standard 8' wide single garage door. They commute an hour each day to work and spend about 1/2 the day either at work or on the commute (of course inching their giant car along the freeway). They buy huge TVs because their family room is so big they'd need a telescope to see a regular sized TV. Of course the people are as big as their TV, houses and cars, after grazing at those all-you-can eat restaurants (more food is better!), as are their debts, health-care costs and stress levels. Yes, we live in a society rich enough to buy big cars, big houses, big TVs, and full of stessed out obese people full of debt.

So I guess I and my family are in the minority of folks in this country (or at least in this forum), as I'm healthy, in good shape, the house (with only one TV inside) is paid for, I have small car payments for the next couple of years for my Honda Fit and my "huge" Ford Freestyle, and I can do this on an average income. It sounds like some of these posts are from brain-washed eight year olds craving the next X-Box! And anyone who thinks a car for peer acceptance needs to get new peers (at least that's what they teach kids).

ateixeira

Dream on, no way will the Smart cost $11k. It will end up around $15-16k, more likely.

The Smart only makes sense if it's given some perks, such as exclusive free parking in urban areas, or perhaps car pool lane access even with only the driver (some jurisdictions already do this for hybrids, so it's possible).

Otherwise it's just a novelty thing, hard to rationalize.

-juice

boaz47

That was a funny post. Perhaps even a great commentary on the American way of life. I do believe you have a point but it might be like spitting in the wind.

snakeweasel

It has been announced that it will start in the $11K range with higher end models going as high as $15K.

So it does makes sense if its in the $11K price range with high gas mileage.

Now if it costs a few thousand less and gets better gas mileage and I only will be using it for commuting and running small errands than its easy to rationalize the Smart.

ateixeira

I'll be surprised if they can actually keep prices that low. My guess is you won't find any cars on the lot for sale for even close to $11k.

Let's see.

-juice

plekto

The Smart has airbags, ABS, traction control, and all the goodies of a typical $20K car just in a tiny package. And it crash-tests pretty well over in Europe. It's exactly like a Yaris but without the area in front of the windshield. Okay, there IS a crumple-zone, but it's built to be a 1-2 ft long bumper/crumple zone and is purpose-built for that, since the engine is in the rear. Think of it as a VW Bug - modernized and brought up to date. Just one that you can park sideways - forget about parallel parking - back in.

It's as safe as any other sub compact. Oh - it also has removeable body panels, so you can swap out the color of your car in about two hours. It's easily as customizeable as a Mini is - and that's going to be half of the fun.

For 11K(they start at about 10K in Europe), it'll sell fast. Plus it handles superbly - like the original Mini almost. (28.5 ft turning radius) That's really tight.

As for mileage, it's 40mpg *combined* - as in a real-world 40mpg. EPA tests should be skewed like 30/50, but 40mpg average is about what a Prius gets. Not bad.

http://www.carpages.co.uk/guide/smart/smart-fortwo-brabus-74bhp.asp
This gives you an idea of what the larger U.S. engine should do - 12 seconds 0-60 isn't so dreadful, considering. The U.S. version will be 1L and 71HP, so about 10-11 seconds(~300cc more displacement means huge amount more torque than the 698cc standard engine - much quicker off the line)

It's a far cry from 15+ seconds from the 50hp version. The transmission has paddles on the wheel as well, which is a nice touch. Just no CVT - even Mini finally saw the error of that choice.

Mr_Shiftright

I'm trying to be very pragmatic... based on current conditions in 99.9% of all American drivers' lives, this car makes no sense whatsoever from a marketing standpoint.

This car should be in a Sharper Image catalog.

plekto

When was the last time anyone actually used the rear seats in an 2-door Aveo or Yaris? Just think of it as a Yaris with the useless rear seats removed(and a lot more room for the front seat as a result).

daysailer

when was the last time that I used the rear seats in my Miata?
Oh, I don't have rear seats?
Nevermind.

jlawrence01

I'm trying to be very pragmatic... based on current conditions in 99.9% of all American drivers' lives, this car makes no sense whatsoever from a marketing standpoint.

For all the people who think that the SmartCar is the hottest thing since sliced bread, I would suggest that they attend a car show and watch the reaction to the vehicle ...

As I have a couple of friends who actually own them in Chicago, I have watched them at a couple of shows.

Some of the responses include:

1) Where do you stick the groceries?
2) Mommy, where do I sit ... there are just two seats?
3) Wow! I would hate to be hit driving out on US-14.
4) Can it handle six inches of snow?
5) There is no room for passengers.
6) Yawn ... we are not that desperate!

My friend was getting more questions about his NSU Prinze and his Fiat 500 that the SmartCar.

Personally, I would buy a Corolla first.

ateixeira

It would make more sense to me if they tried to market the ForTwo roadster. That has the sort of appeal that the Mini has.

I've seen that video crash test of the Smart and it held up quite well, so I don't doubt it's well built. That price really surprises me, I'll have to see it to believe it I guess.

-juice

Mr_Shiftright

Good point. If it were a drop top, at least I could see the "toy factor" justifying a purchase, as with motorycycles.

The very name "Smart" clashes with the marketing. It's not "smart". It should be the FUN or the CULTCAR or something like that. Or even calling it the CITY or the METRO would at least take a stab at what's really going on here....

bumpy

If it were a drop top, at least I could see the "toy factor" justifying a purchase, as with motorycycles.

You realize they are bringing over the cabriolet?

bobw3

As a niche car, it might find a place in cities or university settings for those that might not even own a car right now. There are people who like to project an image of themselves as unique, environmentally friendly, trendy, etc. No, it's never going to be a car for soccer moms, the suburbs, or for insecure men with a bigger-is-better mentality. The Honda Insight has been around for awhile, so these types of niche cars can survive.

Plus, you have to trust the car manufacturer marketers...they have managed to convince the average family of four or less living in the same house that they need to drive a Suburban, so I'm sure they could figure out a way to convince people to drive anything, including a micro-car...but then the car manufacture's finance folks would gripe that they won't get enough profit on the micro-cars, so they should continue to convince people to spend $30-50K on something else.

Of course GM and Ford should look at Honda and Toyota, as the two best car manufacturers out there, and see what they're doing to be successful. One thing being building cars like the Yaris, Fit, Insight and Prius...where are the GM and Ford equivilants to these?

plekto

"City" is owned by Honda - their car a size smaller than the Fit in Japan.

"Metro" is owned by GM/Suzuki.

Not too many names left.

bobw3

The very name "Smart" clashes with the marketing

Maybe it uses the name "Smart" because it's playing off the perception that people who drive small, efficient cars are intellectual types, where-as those driving big SUVs are seen as hicks. I'm not saying that's a true perception, of course.

havalongavalon

"When was the last time anyone actually used the rear seats in an 2-door Aveo or Yaris?"

You are so very right. And, when was the last time anyone actually used the front passenger seat in daily commuting to work?

With this line of reasoning, even the ForTwo is too big. It could be just 3' wide, and 2/3 the weight. The marketing strategy that might make some sense is a Smart ForOne. Maybe.

And... for $3,000.

daysailer

for the Smart Roadster, if it had a manual transmission.

lilengineerboy

havalongavalon

Exactly! But with a steel cage around it. And four wheels for greater stability. That's it.

OK, say $5,000.

snakeweasel

You are so very right. And, when was the last time anyone actually used the front passenger seat in daily commuting to work?

The vast majority of cars I see on the daily commute have one person in them. Thats why the Smart makes perfect sense for a second commuter car.

plekto

Lovely bike.

***quote***
With this line of reasoning, even the ForTwo is too big. It could be just 3' wide, and 2/3 the weight.
***
Beat me to it

Now that's a real single-person's commuting machine.

bumpy

And, when was the last time anyone actually used the front passenger seat in daily commuting to work?

I put an 80-pound brake drum in mine this morning.

With this line of reasoning, even the ForTwo is too big. It could be just 3' wide, and 2/3 the weight.

It's been done.

Mr_Shiftright

BUMPY: I think that link is busted.

The reason you don't see someone in the passenger or rear seat of commuter cars is because you are only seeing that car for one part of its daily life and use.

You may or may not see someone in the back seat of a Yaris but you'll never see anyone in the back seat of a Smart.

$12,000 is pretty steep for a vehicle condemned to a single purpose. That's why it's more like a motorcycle--its uses are severely limited, whereas a Yaris can do multiple tasks easily.

And what does the size matter when commuting anyhow? If anything you want a really comfortable car--can you imagine visibility in a Smart on a highway clogged with SUVs? Better fly flags on the roof :P

snakeweasel

The reason you don't see someone in the passenger or rear seat of commuter cars is because you are only seeing that car for one part of its daily life and use.

Look at it this way. Jack and Jill both drive to work, they work in different areas so they drive two different cars. In the evening and weekends and holidays when they go someplace they only take one car. Mow Jill can get that 4 door sedan or SUV or van to drive to work and for her and Jack to use on the weekends. Jack on the other hand will only use his car to commute and maybe run a small errand or two every now and again. So does Jack need a car that seats 5 people? No Jack can easily drive something like a Smart because there will never be a time where he will need room for more than one person.

$12,000 is pretty steep for a vehicle condemned to a single purpose.

Effectively there are millions of cars on the road condemned to a single purpose. How many two car families are there were one car is, or can be, only used for commuting? Very many.

I will use me and my wife for instance. Her car never sees a second person in it. She drives it to and from work and occasionally to the kids or her sisters. All other times we drive my car. Her car is basically condememd to a single use and costs far more than $12K.

My neighbors are the same way, one car (which costs far more than $12K) is used primarily for commuting and rarely, if ever, sees more than one person in it.

And what does the size matter when commuting anyhow?

Not much apparently because people see Mini's, people see motorcycles.

ateixeira

Miata has been successful, I think they've sold 700k in this country alone.

Insight sold in such low volumes, and it's been discontinued. It sold at a loss all along.

Smart ForTwo will sell in tiny volumes, not even 10% of Aveo sales numbers. I hope they're realistic with the sales forecasts.

-juice

daysailer

light, nimble, quick, economical and easy to park, high vantage point with little to obstruct your view. Weather (and foreign object) protection is its only real downside. A really small, quick, nimble, lightweight car is the next best thing.

bumpy

Links fixed.

ateixeira

I've owned several bikes and had THREE stolen from me.

So let's paint the whole picture, they are also:

* unsafe
* impractical
* can carry little/no cargo
* extremely easy to steal
* impractical in foul weather

I don't see americans buying motorcycles en masse even if gas stayed at $4 per gallon forever.

-juice

bobw3

A two seater would be too impractical for our family, since my commuter car is also our back-up car when we drop off the big car for an oil change or something, and our weekend trip car when we don't need the big car's carrying capability. That's why I don't think microcars are suited for families, but for single folks, or childless couples. Sort of a step up from a scooter or motorcycle.

bobw3

Looks like the three-wheeled Reliants I used to see in England.

Mr_Shiftright

I don't see why a car that's been a red-ink product in Europe, which loves little cars, is suddenly going to be a smash hit in America, which hates little cars.

bumpy

Europe loves the tax breaks on small cars, more than anything else. I doubt anyone thinks the Smart will post 100,000 a year in sales, but it should manage 20,000 in its first year here and settle down to low-mid teens per year after that. Solstice numbers, to put it another way.

havalongavalon

The Tango website claims "the electric Tango T600 is designed to beat most sports cars in the quarter mile with acceleration from 0 to 60 mph in just 4 seconds and a top speed of 150 mph!"

Ooops -- seems just a bit excessive given those tiny wheels (12"?) and it's half as wide as it is tall, isn't it?

lilengineerboy

So let's paint the whole picture, they are also:

* unsafe
Safe or unsafe is a relative scale. Is there more risk riding a motorcycle than driving a Crown Vic, yes. Does that make it inherently unsafe? No

* impractical
For transporting one person to work and back it is pretty practical. For driving the little league car pool, less so. Practicality depends on your needs.

* can carry little/no cargo
Can carry a backpack, which is pretty much all that most people need to transport. You can't have 3 old bags of McDonalds Value Meals laying around. In fact, getting rid of the 200 lbs of un-necessary carp that most people have in their car would help MPG.

* extremely easy to steal
Because a Civic or Integra isn't? I would assume this would be a regional thing but I haven't had an issue with bikes, motorized or not, while I have a car wander into the wrong hands.

* impractical in foul weather
Move somewhere warm

Logic flaws that allow opinion to masquerade as fact are especially frightening. I'm sorry you didn't enjoy having a motorcycle.

bumpy

It would do okay in a straight line, but it's not my first choice for autocross. :surprise:

snakeweasel

For transporting one person to work and back it is pretty practical.

Only if you live very close to work.

Move somewhere warm

The only problem is in most warm areas you sweat to death peddling and then you stink up the place the whole day,

bobw3

Just make sure you live higher than you work. That way you can coast to work (therefore, no sweat/stink) and get your exercise on the way home.

snakeweasel

Just make sure you live higher than you work.

I always do...oops you mean higher elevation don't you?

lilengineerboy

The bike in question was not the type one would pedal, although prior to moving across the country, I typically would commute by bicycle. It was about 8 miles each way and it took about 30 minutes. I really didn't sweat on this ride as I was in pretty good shape back then.
When I got a real job, I had a backpack thing that would hold work clothes and a laptop, which is pretty much all I need to function anyway.

fitluver

The Tango website claims "the electric Tango T600 is designed to beat most sports cars in the quarter mile with acceleration from 0 to 60 mph in just 4 seconds and a top speed of 150 mph!"

Ooops -- seems just a bit excessive given those tiny wheels (12"?) and it's half as wide as it is tall, isn't it?

I wondered too about this because the car weighs over 3300 lbs.

Mr_Shiftright

I just read that website and man oh man, there's a lot of blue sky in there....

Also the T600 is $108,000. That seems a bit high, but what with the gas savings and all......

walterquint

This may have been mentioned already: I wonder how much the Smart car will cost to insure. Probably more than you think......i'm convinced the Yaris/Fit are as small as Americans will go. Whether the Smart would be a city car or not, all cars venture beyond their typical mission occasionally. I wouldn't want to drive the Smart on any American highway and no one else will either.