NBC Nightly News tonight lauded the new (to America) Smart car from Mercedes Benz.[1] Smarts have been around for a number of years in Europe and have proved relatively popular both in Britain and on the continental mainland.
Given a choice of eleven different models, ranging from the basic “Fortwo Pure” at 61 bhp to the rangy Smart “Fortwo BRABUS Cabrio” at 98 bhp, it would seem there is one to suit anybody – or at least, anyone with no children, as the Smart is only a two-seater.
NBC made much of the car for inner city commuting, particularly it’s ability to park on a dime, but then came the shock. According to the US EPA the car only returns a combined town/highway gas consumption of 36 mpg.
Asked about such an appalling figure from a 999cc engine, the dealer responded in true dealership fashion:
“You know, there’s a fine line between performance expectation and maximum fuel economy.”
Excuse me?
Presumably, he was trying to say that if you want it to go reasonably quickly, it requires more gasoline? Then why is the American version fitted with a governor that caps top speed at 84 mph, when the basic European car manages 90 mph and the BRABUS 95 mph?
All this may seem somewhat irrelevant until one discovers the Smart’s European counterparts manage to return fuel economy figures that make the US version look like a ten ton truck.[2]
Town/highway figures show the European BRABUS returns a respectable 54 mpg, and the basic Smart manages a devastatingly appealing 60 mpg.
Which begs the question: why do foreign cars sold in America always produce poorer gas mileage figures than their European or Asian counterparts? The US Smart manages a figure over a third less, from the same 999cc turbo-charged engine.
It makes no sense, unless one becomes incredibly cynical and dares to suggest a political element limiting the scope of non-American motor manufacturers?
[1] “NBC – Inspiring Envy With The Anti-SUV”
Filed under: U.S. not so Smart
R J Adams January 27, 2008 at 8:03pm
Wisewebwoman January 27, 2008 at 10:52 pm
I’m with you on the Smart Car, RJA, I would have got one myself only for the long treks I have to go on across country with luggage and dog and occasional passenger. I hear you on the mileage.
We have the Zenn (Zero emission no noise) car invented in Canada http://zenncars.com/ but it is not approved for use yet (!!!) (18 months and counting) apart from in BC and parts of U.S.
Reminds me of the electric car that was banned years and years ago.
Big Oil involved? That saintly bunch? Never!!
Jo January 28, 2008 at 6:43 am
I am completely befuddled – surely they are the same cars? Or are they manufactured differently in the US? My sister-in-law had a Smart car, but when her work asked her to start doing silly mileage (Brighton to Manchester and back), she asked for a slightly more comfortable one!
Twilight January 28, 2008 at 9:37 am
(In best German accent)…Ve–eery interesting, RJ – but not funny!
It’s time somebody slapped the oil industry down good and proper in the US.
That’s a cute little vehicle, but I think most people would have to be rich enough use it only as a second car, with all attendant expenses. I can’t imagine it feeling safe on some of the urban highway systems here, sandwiched between two big semis – I’d be scared s-less!
This Old Brit January 28, 2008 at 11:57 am
My feelings are the same as Twilight’s and Jo’s regarding safety on motoways. Especially those very open ones, and ones with viaducts in particular. Every time we have howling gales (which are regular occurances in a lot of areas) much heavier vehicles are regularly blown over and/or off the road.
As for the milage performance (or more accurately, under-performance), being “fixed” in America, I think that’s a given.
RJ Adams January 29, 2008 at 7:12 am
WWW – sadly, the ZENN website was so slow I had to give up for the time being on checking it out more thoroughly. You’re right, Big Oil probably has more to answer for about damaging the planet than anyone else. They have blocked research into ‘green’ vehicles for years.
Jo – America has ‘different’ regulations re emissions, etc than Europe. They’re not better, just different. The Smart car is imported and “Americanized” before being offered for sale. I have no way of knowing if this is the reason for the fuel consumption differences, but it seems likely.
Twilight – Vee haf vays off makin’ ya drive zis teeny leetle mota car ……..
I drive a mid-engined, two-seat, Pontiac Fiero. It’s so low to the ground I could drive under most semis! (English translation: semi = articulated lorry). Surprisingly, I feel very safe in it (even though it is American-built…..he added!)
TOB – I had you down as a ‘big-car’ man.
Jen Clark March 2, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Have you found any explanations for this since you wrote this post?
Weetus March 5, 2008 at 12:38 am
I have one that seems to get good mileage. I will be doing a mileage test over this next week. As far as safety, they sit farther off the ground than other cars I’ve owned and has better visibility. It’s actually a great second car for a couple since if one of you needs to do a lot of freeway driving or haul things around you can use the ‘big car.’ But the Smart can haul more than 6-8 bags of groceries without any problem. If the mileage sits around 40 mpg one could easily go for a Yaris or Prius instead. This year the EPA has also jacked around with the MPG ratings, so God only knows what that does to the realistic mileage. Is Big Oil involved? Most likely, since you’re talking about a country that’s for sale to the highest bidder.
Shawn March 21, 2008 at 9:30 pm
The answer is very easy and anyone following this car knows why.
First the car is peppier then any euro version. They knew if they went for the max econo version it would never fly in the USA due to the poor acceleration numbers. For the first year in the USA they must pick a trans/engine/looks combo that most can agree with. Americans don’t like diesel cars (for many wrong reasons) so bring the high mileage diesel wouldn’t work either.
Even Americans looking for a small computer car (they think) will not want a car that takes 20 sec to get to highway driving speeds.
As far as the top speed governor there are many technical theories why they would do that ranging from safety data or warranty theory. Only the importer (Penske) knows for sure.
Most early data coming in (even with the new USA EPA MPG ratings) are showing this car getting close to 40mpg on the highway. That is in line with the power, torque curve of this engine and the performance it delivers.
The first couple of years the Mini didn’t produce great numbers either getting 32mpg and now they have it up to 40mpg. Give it some time and it will improve. In the mean time they have the USA the engine they feel is the best combo of performance, drivability (reads noise, smoothness, ect) and fuel economy as goofy as you think that sounds.
I’m not defending it, only explaining why it the MPG stinks. If MPG was the ONLY goal they they would have got the diesel that gets 70+mpg. Do some Google work and you find all studies show Americans have (and incorrect) view that diesel engines are still noisy, smelly and bad for the environment.
yev April 2, 2008 at 8:38 am
the zenn car sucks, its not even a car its an enclosed golf cart. 35 miles range not allowed on roads with speed limits faster than 35 miles. takes 8 hours to recharge its garbage.
The reason the smart car gets worse mileage here in the US is because of the catalytic converters used here are inferior to the ones used in europe
Jerry April 4, 2008 at 11:14 pm
I don’t know if it played a factor in this case, but it must be remembered that the American gallon is only 3.8 litres, while the Imperial gallon is 4.54l. Americans just get 20% lower mileage because of their smaller gallon.
duncan May 9, 2008 at 2:40 pm
I just looked at the new smart cars in the San Antonio showroom was appalled at the low gas mileage!! I am a Brit and lived in London where these were every where.
I seemed to remember them doing about 70 MPG in the UK – so I checked the UK Auto Car web reviews to make sure: and for the 70hp Passion it is listed as 51 MPG town (adjusted for the US gallon)and 84 MPG (adjusted for US gallon) highway.
WHAT have they done to the car here in the US???? They are only estimating a corresponding 33 MPG and 41 MPG – not much more than my Focus!
Such a great car but it will not catch on with this poor gas milage – shame, a real shame.
duncan May 9, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Woops i think I got my coversion upside down!! Comparitive MPGs I think shoulb be:
UK SPEC:
CITY: 43 MPG (=36 MPG US)
HWY: 70 MPG (= 58 MPG US)
US SPEC CAR: (using US gallon)
CITY: 33 MPG
HWY: 41 MPG
Better – but still a far cry from the Euro spec….
Tom May 19, 2008 at 1:22 pm
although I agree with Shawns assessment reference Americans not wanting diesel or low acceleration vehicles the times are changing and maybe the auto manufacturers should consider giving us stupid americans a choice. I’m a big boy and resent the fact that big industry does my thinking for me. Thanks for the insite shawn
Weetus May 20, 2008 at 2:33 pm
So far I’m getting around 42 to 45 with mine. One factor that might effect the EPA’s rating is that they might not be starting with a proper fill (you have to top up the tank like a motorcycle). Also, if like most, you are comparing the Smart’s EPA MPG to the 2007 or earlier MPG ratings of cars like the Yaris or Prius then your numbers are completely out of whack and you need to check http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm. The Smart is still getting better MPG than any non-hybrids. I’m also always scoring great on-street parking.
Sravnation May 20, 2008 at 3:08 pm
So are we talking about gasoline vs. diesel engines as well? If we are, there is much better gas mileage from diesel fuel due to the mere energy content. I don’t believe there are mileage conspiracies going on… often digging deeper into the story leads to some very reasonable series of actions.
Greg May 22, 2008 at 9:55 pm
I just put a deposit on a smart cabrio, so I’ll wait a year for it. Yep, the hybrids (Prius) get better gas mileage. But, my cabrio will probably cost me (fully loaded) about $18.5k, vs roughly $23k for the Prius. I am too tired to do the math right now, but average the $4.5k against the MPG differential, and I bet you come out about the same over a 5 yr period.
John May 26, 2008 at 8:14 am
So BIG OIL is stopping high MPG vehicles from hitting the US Market? Maybe, in looking at the US market, Smart Car figured it would be tough to sell a car that goes 0-60 in 13 sec, so it boosted the performance at the cost of some MPG. The market for this car is primarily upper middle class folks that can afford a secondary car to make a statement. To them, giving others the impression that they care about the environment is most important, not the actual result.
For example, why does the Prius outsell the Civic Hybrid by such a wide margin? Both get comparable mileage. Simple, if you drive a Prius, everyone knows you’re in a hybrid, and thus you must care deeply about the environment. Thus, you are superior to us unenlightened pleebs that don’t know any better. If you drive the Honda, whose styling is not so differentiated, few make the connection.
Ironically, the environmental damage and pollution caused by mining the battery minerals and then shipping the material around the world for processing is grater than that casued by any other car. I’m talking real pollution, not CO2 emission. If you’ve been led to believe that CO2 emissions are causing GW, then you should know the carbon footprint of a Prius is greater than that of a Hummer over a 5 year period when you factor in the energy used in the entire manufacturing process.
MBG May 29, 2008 at 3:08 pm
“For example, why does the Prius outsell the Civic Hybrid by such a wide margin?â€
Well John, for one reason the Prius has clearly superior technology. Crawling along or stopped in traffic? The Prius shuts off the gas motor and can run on electricity alone whereas the Civic uses is rather small electric assist to boost the smaller gas engine. The Prius gets better mileage! Honda has sadly dropped the ball on hybrids.
And that silly article by Chris Demorro claiming that the “Prius Outdoes Hummer in Environmental Damage†has been debunked all over the internet – but if your in love with conspiracy theories – look no further.
Jeff May 29, 2008 at 4:55 pm
I got one of the first ones in the States. I live in SF (hills), and I am averaging just 20 MPG with mine! I called the dealer today who verified that one other owner is having similar issues and they verified it getting just 22 MPG. I am going to force the manufacturer to give me a new one if they don’t find a fix.
Also, the projected gas mileage for the US changed to reflect the faster freeways (used to be based on 55 MPH, now is 65 MPH). So mileage for the same car from 06 to 08 should have dropped about 20%, just because the test changed.
Chris May 29, 2008 at 8:15 pm
I am a brit who’s been waiting for these cars to become available in the US now for some time. Well imagine my dissapointment to find out the gas milage is so terrible. If I decide to import a European model am I going to run into any complications here in the US??????
Phil Goetz June 1, 2008 at 8:59 pm
I have a 1992 Honda Civic VX that’s about twice as big as a smart car, with a 1.4L engine and 92hp, and it currently gets 40MPG overall (combination of city and highway driving).
Why don’t they make the Civic VX anymore? I believe its VTEC engine is the most fuel-efficient gasoline automobile engine ever built.
justme June 3, 2008 at 5:27 pm
I dont think big oil is in it alone since OUR government taxes the fuel and if they allowed high MPG cars in then their fuel tax revenues would go down and they couldnt/WOULDNT allow that.
I personally wouldnt even consider a SMART car if it gets less than 70MPG city, but thats just me.
John G. June 5, 2008 at 12:50 am
I am looking at getting one but am a bit curious here. And would it hurt to offer the Brabus. Europe always gets the hot cars.Power to WT. That is wht a motorcycle moves rapidly and gets great mpg.Being underpowered requires the engine t work harder and thus use more fuel.I,ll leave the pulpit now1
Noel June 9, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Now if only we can take this hostility towards BIG OIL and and apply it to BIG EDUCATION.Take a look at Harvard’s books and you might not be ready to drag in every oil executive.Amen to NO subsidies for oil companies,however.
Jack Palmer June 11, 2008 at 10:24 am
Chris, You can’t import a European model. It has to conform to EPA standards by law. They will impound the car at the Port of entry and either you will have to pay BIG bucks to make it U.S. road worthy or they will destroy it. I know this from working for Land Rover North America for a number of years.We did bring test vehicles into the U.S., but for a limited time only and then they had to be rturned to the U.K.
slappy June 22, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Wow, I never realized that the MPG on the SMART was terrible. I guess I’ll skip this one for the future. You can buy a Toyota, Honda, Hyundai or Kia with more features, seating for four and gas mileage in the mid 30′s or better. It’s a shame the SMART is a failure in MPG.
Rob July 8, 2008 at 8:13 am
Like others, I’ve been researching into these cars. I’m extremely disappointed. Other than being able to park in small spots, what a stupid car. I’ve been comparing it to the Prius. The Prius gets better mileage, can seat
five people, four comfortably, has way bigger storage, and runs cleaner. Even after you factor in the extra price on the sticker, the Prius would seem far better value considering what all the extras you get.
Chris July 12, 2008 at 6:12 pm
I have been driving the SMART in Los Angeles for appr. 2,000 miles.
I get between 20.5 and 23 miles per gallon. Never got even close to 33 mpg.
The dealer claims they have never heard of such a low mileage. The asked me
to keep my gas receipts to prove that I am getting Premium Gas.
This mileage is more then bad. I get 19 – 21 miles in my MB 230 Coup
Kompressor.
I will not let up with SMART Car until this issue gets resolved.
Jimbo July 14, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Strange isn’t it. Saw one on the road the other day and thought boy that must get 60mpg for sure. How come I can get 37 out of my ’02 Saturn sedan but this barely cracks that…
Gaynelle July 17, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Why is it no one is outraged that the US version doesn’t get the MPG as the European models of Smart cars?
Charles Toast July 28, 2008 at 12:13 pm
I’m dismayed at the low level of discussion on this thread. It took many posts before somebody pointed out the simple fact of Imperial gallons being 25% larger than US gallons.
The driver in L.A. getting 20mpg from his SMART gives no meaningful account of the kind of driving he’s doing. If he’s crawling in traffic at 3 or 4 mph with the A/C on, it might not be that surprising. He should probably ride a bike instead. As for the 19mpg he gets from his 230 coup – he didn’t say, but that might be in entirely different conditions.
SMART Lover August 1, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Hey Charles — Stuff it. I know your type … if “Chris from LA” did actually ride his bike you’d complain about all of the “extra” CO2 emmissions he was creating and tell him that he should be walking instead.
“If he’s crawling in traffic at 3 or 4 mph with the A/C on, it might not be that surprising” — What’s your point? Only people who live in cool climates with no traffic need apply for your precious SMART car??? That doesn’t sound very practical to me.
The point here is that when buying one of these vehicles you are looking at the cost (smaller size/functional utility/etc.) vs. the benefit (higher gas mileage/massaged ego) … if that equation is calculated under misguided fuel efficiency figures then the payoff to the consumer might not be worth the cost. In other words — you were sold a “bill of goods.”
Therefore, “Chris from LA”‘s input is actually quite relevant and yours, well, it is quite useless.
Tom Sawyer August 6, 2008 at 2:22 pm
I think what the oil companies do is criminal. Whenever high gas prices are discussed nobody mentions the fact that they (oil companies) are padding the higher prices with higher profits for themselves.
I was interested in the Smart car at one time. The gas mileage isn’t what it should be and the car would be safer on roads free of SUVs and big trucks – big trucks and SUVs that normally only have one or two people in them.
SMART Lover August 8, 2008 at 11:56 am
Maybe the US should nationalize the oil co’s and redistribute all of the profits to “the people” … the “windfall” you speak of seems to be doing wonders for Venezuela and Russia. Lots of smiling faces … no poverty … a veritable Utopia … NOT!
Bprimerano August 13, 2008 at 9:00 am
I drive a 99 Saturn SL2. With 150K miles on it, I am currently getting 40mpg (US gallons, combined driving) with this 10 year old technology.
Colleen August 16, 2008 at 6:08 pm
It’s a big relief to find out why the Smart Car gets such poor mileage in the U.S. Hopefully, eventually they will offer better models to us.
The blame for our disappointing choice of cars here can be laid partially at the oil companies’ door for discouraging alternative fuels (yes, I saw Who Killed The Electric Car?), but we are also to blame for the appalling stuff that we Americans want to buy. Can you say “SUV”? Burning large quantities of fuel in order to appear stylish?
My favorite all-time car was a 1985 Honda Civic CRX-HF. It was rated for 63mpg highway, and I could actually come close to that if I closed the windows and drove 55. I got in the mid-40s in town. It broke my heart to sell it after 12 years, but I had a baby and the CRX only had 2 seats. I still mourn it.
Currently I have a 2004 Pontiac Vibe (it’s the same car as the Toyota Matrix), which had to be special-ordered so I could get a manual transmission and 2 wheel drive. I live in Jackson, Wyoming, but with good winter tires I am not hampered unduly in getting around. So many people move here from other places (cough cough, California) and feel they must buy a big four-wheel drive vehicle. Anyway, I keep track, and I get 30-35mpg in town and in the mid-40s on the highway. Better mileage than the Smart Car is reputed to have–though we do have one Smart Car locally, and the owner says he gets mileage similar to mine (never mind I have 3 times the cargo capacity).
Unfortunately, they quit making my CRX model after about 3 years–the engine was pepped up so the mileage went down–and the same thing seems to have happened to the Vibe. While it is common to bemoan $4 gas, I think the country would be a lot better off if gas gets up to $8 or so, then maybe Americans would smarten up in their buying habits.
Of course there’s still the question of all the existing gas-guzzlers. The government might need to do a buy-back the way they do with guns in some cities…
rita September 2, 2008 at 10:52 am
I have to say that I’m in the market for a car and I’ve just started researching. I haven’t even looked at a car since 1999 at which time I bought a new Hyundai Accent. It was getting 35+ MPG and I think still is (haven’t checked with the current owner of the car).
But I’m shocked and amazed at how the fuel efficiency of new cars has dropped in the last 9 years!!! How, in this world of ever better technology, can the fuel efficiency go down? There’s only one answer that I can think of…..
cash September 11, 2008 at 1:06 pm
We have had the smart for about 1 month in SF and are seeing about 20 MPG in the city. I will take a cue from Chris in LA b/c this really seems loooooooow. I would think we’d get AT LEAST, oh, i dunno, 28??!?
voxelman September 23, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Increased vehicle safety requirements have incresed vehicle weight and impacted the fuel economy figures for many small cars. Smart cars have very rigid passenger compartments and have shown off very favorably in crash tests. Their limited crush zones are offset to some degree by effective air bags. A local owner that imported theirs through Mexico reports 70 mpg highway on regular during several round trips from El Paso, TX to southeast Iowa. This was for a 2001 Smart Fortwo. Sad to see that the current models that are available in the US are getting so much less. I drive a Zap Xebra PK about 5 miles daily with an electricity cost of about 5 cents/mile. This does not include battery replacement costs a not insignificant consideration. The creature comforts of the Smart Fortwo are way above the Xebra and hearing the owners reports of 70 mpg mileage I was ready to sell the Xebra but not for 20 to 23 mpg.
Patrick September 30, 2008 at 7:33 am
I current own a 2001 Chevy Metro LSI 1.3L 4 door sedan that does 35 city / 40 hwy. Who would drive that little car for the same mileage as the metro with a backseat, a very spacious trunk for its size and its not a rolling death trap when you hit an SUV.
Paul October 26, 2008 at 1:52 am
I’m confused too…Just owned a 2002 Toyota Echo, and averaged 38.5 mpg combined. What’s with this efficiency dysfunction? I too remember the 1993 Geo Metro, which performed at 53 mpg highway. And why is the Honda Insight no longer built?
top57 December 4, 2008 at 11:50 am
I’m confused by the lack of fuel economy in the United States. I travel quit a lot I just returned for GB and I rented a Vauxhall 4dr sedan and averaged 40+mpg for five wks of driving. Last year I spent five weeks in Germany and I rented a VW Golf TDI 4dr sedan and I averaged 51mpg and I never tried to drive economically. When the Smart cars were introduced to the USA I bought one because I know in the UK they get 60mpg, to my disappointment the best I can get out of mine is 38mpg on my best behavior. On top of that you have to use premium 92 octane fuel to get that mileage, the engine they chose to use has 10-1 compression and won’t run on regular gas, this is supposed to be an economy car. Perhaps if our Auto-makers were allowed to go bankrupt we would finally get some decent cars in this country.
PureRenegade January 9, 2009 at 4:32 am
You know, I’m interested in the Diesel Smart because I’m gonna void that warranty and convert it to run WVO, like my current two automobiles. I’d really like to get that Smart Car to do it’s 35mpg petro-free.
But check it out, I’m driving a 2001 VW Jetta right now and it gets 50mpg. And decades ago I drove a 1989 Ford Festiva that got 55mpg. I’m not sure why everyone is supporting this whole “green” consumer movement and not just cutting out the consumer cycled altogether, going with a used car, and getting (far) better gas mileage too?
I mean, I know old cars look … older. But so do new cars in a few years:-)
tim January 29, 2009 at 8:11 am
hello to all,
i hope im not gettin too far off the subject,but if these cars(US version) get poorer gas mileage because they are “peppier” then shouldnt their HP ratings be higher? and how do some of you explain this… the US LS600h gets 21MPG combined whereas its european counterpart manages 25MPG? im not sure why this is the case , but i’m pretty sure that pepp has got nothing to do with it.
Jeff Weber April 29, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Judging by a lot of the comments on this forum, many of you need to wake up to what’s really happening. I see a number of comments on here blaming “big oil” and “big auto” for gouging consumers. This is a common myth being perpetrated by the pablum media. Fact is you are blaming the wrong people.
When they talk about “record oil profits” they are talking about gross profit. The truth is that the oil companies net profit after taxes is about the same or going down compared to what it used to be. The truth is that it’s the government that’s pocketing most of those “record oil profits.”
As for the disappointing mileage people are getting with the Smart Car–it’s not surprising considering the draconian restrictions placed on emissions by the EPA. The fact is the government does not really want us to get better gas mileage. They want us to use more gasoline so they can collect more tax revenue. And it’s only going to get worse. As we speak, the government is holding a gun to Congresses head to pass measures that would make carbon monoxide a pollutant. If Congress fails to act on this, the President will authorize the EPA to begin penalizing companies that produce too much CO2. Since it requires energy to make virtually anything and energy consumption produces CO2, this will drive prices up on everything.
This whole smart car thing is just another part of the Global Warming scam being pushed by the government. Fact is the solution does nothing to reduce CO2 emissions. In fact it could very well be increasing them. And its all being pushed to solve a problem. i.e. Man-Made Global Warming, that doesn’t exist.
Still the same, I think I could save a lot of money by changing out the transmission and rear end gears on my riding lawn mower and then building a cab over it.
John Nimtz May 9, 2009 at 9:00 pm
I spent $6000 for a 10 year old Lincoln Mark VIII with less than 100k miles on it (grandma’s car, honest). I get 23 mpg as a daily driver and 30 on the highway.
Figuring 12,000 miles driven per year, the difference between 23 and 33 mpg is 158 gallons. At $3 per gallon is $474 per year. Even for the starter model the break-even takes over 12 years. (Over 30 years for the top model.) It makes no sense (read – not smart).
My car is luxurious, seats 4 very comfortably, and at 295 hp it is 225 hp more than the (not so) Smart car.
I’ll stick with Detroit iron until we wise up.
R J Adams May 10, 2009 at 9:53 pm
John Nimtz – no, no, John, you’ve missed the point. People buy the Smart car because they wish to be environmentally friendly, and green. The only problem is – it isn’t!
thor July 9, 2009 at 9:54 pm
easy
the Euros are lying to themselves with their gas milage. The ADAC ( German auto club) has proven that the real milage is 20 plus percent lower than the manufacturer claim ..here in the US the mpg claims are much more realistic…
no big oil not the “man” no conspirancy, except that the euros are getting shafted
Dorian Driskell July 28, 2009 at 7:27 pm
I agree that the US Smart’s mileage is disappointing, given how compromised the car is.
However, one VERY important thing people should be aware of is that MPG is a misleading measure of efficiency; it’s far more instructive to think in terms of GPM (or the more user-friendly liters/100km).
MPG gives a grotesquely distorted impression of the merits of improving already-decent mileage, versus getting rid of the real guzzlers. It looks more impressive to improve from 35 mpg to 60 mpg than from 10 to 12 mpg. But improving from 10 to 12 saves 167 gallons over 10,000 miles, while improving from 35 mpg to 60 mpg saves only 119 gallons over the same distance. Improving from 20 mpg to 30 mpg also saves 167 gallons over 10,000 miles. Improving from 50 mpg to 100 mpg (say, by converting your Prius to a plug-in hybrid) saves 100 gallons over 10K miles.
The formula for gallons saved over a given distance by getting one mpg versus another is as follows:
Distance*(MPGhi – MPGlo)/(MPGhi * MPGlo)
Obviously, every gallon saved helps, and I’m not arguing against shooting for the highest possible mileage. Rather, I’m arguing that one Prius or Smart doesn’t make up for one Hummer; the math doesn’t pencil out that way. Gas guzzler taxes should be FAR higher to reflect this reality.
Bill Newkirk August 4, 2009 at 6:41 pm
The guy who made the comment on imperial gallons being 25% more than US must have different info than I do. I thought an imperial gallon was 4 liters, which are less than 5% larger than a US gallon. I was in line for gas in my Mini Cooper behind a Smart car and asked the gentleman what kind of mileage he was getting. He said 38 and does a lot of it on the freeway. My lowest on a tank of gas for my MINI was 37 and I have a short commute to work (less than 15 minutes) that barely warms up the car.
AZ car nut August 8, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Look folks, you’re not comparing apples to apples.
What sells in the US is what people will sell. If a slow car doesnt sell, one wont stick around for long – its not a small investment to import or make cars, so few people will take the risk without promise of reward. Even those willing to drive slow cars often prefer ones with a bit more power.
Second, Ive got a sneeking suspicion that due the VERY WIDE gap between american and european driving habits, that EPA estimations will rarely, if ever, mirror what is had on euro streets. The average american uses highspeed freeways more often, and for the most part are travelling much greater distances.
Its no conspiracy of the oil companies to try to keep us shackled to oil. If they wanted, they could delivery half the inventory at 3 times the price and we would all have to figure something out – meanwhile, they have reduced overhead for the reduced need for transporting the goods, and would reap a higher margin. The oil companies will ALWAYS keep output where their profits are maximized like ANY BUSINESS SHOULD.
Smart people realize that its in their best interest (assuming they want to save gas money) to be the ONLY one owning a fuel efficient vehicle. If everyone did, the price of fuel would just rise to meet an adjusted equilibrium. As far as the environment goes, its not the oil companies fault you keep buying their gas – its your own fault. They offer a product based on need, if there was no need and therefore no demand, they would cease to exist.
SO why dont all the tree huggers quit whining about gas, and buy a horse or a plug-in electric vehicle? Im tired of other people wanting to take away MY CHOICES because of their OPINION. You drive your ecar, I wont. I will, however, keep riding my motorcycle to reduce my monthly gas costs.
Market follows demand, got it people? So until the MAJORITY actually DEMANDS tree-hugger-friendly vehicles – they wont sell in high numbers. Its the responsibility of the PEOPLE – not politicians. If we continue to rely on the government to impose upon the auto industry, rather than letting buying trends of the people guide the auto industry, there wont be any manufacturers left (making a profit).
Personally, Id be willing to bet that the majority of the impact on the environment has to do with our THROW AWAY mentality of vehicles. If we demanded decently efficient vehicles capable of many hundreds of thousands of miles prior to being scrapped – the total impact to the environment would be lowered a great deal more than building greater numbers of these plastic monsters that are neither recyclable, nor degradable. Now combine to that, very toxic batteries used to propel the electric motors that are full of heavy metals, both of which rely on unfriendly plastics and polymers that arent too ‘green’ either. Id bet that the total lifecycle impact of a 1972 ford F100 after 50,000 miles would be far less than that of one of these smart cars, hybrids, or other plastic maggots after 100,000 miles…
Bill Venne September 14, 2009 at 1:27 pm
I’ve had a Smart Car for a year now. For the first eight months it averaged about 38mpg. I thought that was pretty good considering some of the negative comments concerning their fuel efficiency. Strangely, over the last three months the average fuel consumption of my vehicle has dropped to 31 mpg. Driving habits and conditions seem to be the same. It’s beginning to match the efficiency of my Buick Ultra. The Smart car is still fun to drive.
Tim September 25, 2009 at 11:03 pm
Hey guys,
I just got my smart cabriolet and I love it. I am getting about 35 mpg average. I drive down I-95 some as well as around town. I got it for me because my wife has a 2004 chevy malibu getting about 26 average with commute and local driving. I am not rich and am not upper class. My wife makes $7.32 an hour @ about 38 hours a week. I work out on the road doing road construction. I drive a work only company truck. My vehicle was a 2003 GMC 1500 HD 4×4 6.0 liter. My average was about 10.5 for my week end ramblings. This was with NO off road mind you. I could not ask for my wife’s car without lip as she ‘might’ want to go to town. It was no problem for me to spend $80 in gas on the weekend. I loved my truck but said good bye black hole. I bought my smart not for environment but for my wallet. For me, Myrtle Beach is over an hour away. Me and my wife rode down the beach last weekend and cruised a little (ha ha me 40 and cruising) and came back home for 8 bucks. I love my smart car. Oh and I have wanted a Prius for about 3 years. But, I live in Dillon, SC and found that since it is a hybrid, that I would have to take it to Columbia for repairs and service. I am an ex-toyota fan. One other thing guys. We guys like to have heavy feet sometimes and feel a little power. There is something about the smart that I have not heard out of any person. This is the catch. The smart is a automated manual. It shifts the gears for you and decreases the throttle between shifts. The smart has plenty of pep for passing or whatever when in the manual mode.
You can change gears with the shifter between the seats or with the finger shifter
paddles right on the steering wheel. Hey guys, I know that it is different strokes for different folks, but, I love my smart.
Tim September 25, 2009 at 11:45 pm
I just wanted to add that I really hate it for the people that are getting low mpg with their
smart. I know how that feels. I had a 3500 chevy 5.7 liter 1 ton 15 passenger van that I drove back and forth to Raleigh, NC @ 2.5 hour
trip getting 14.5 mpg. I got a chance transfer to a job 30 mins. away and traded my van for a new 2005 Toyota Tocoma. The window sticker had 16 city and 21 hwy. From day 1 I got 10 mpg. No matter where or how I drove, it was the same. From having the tail gate down and carefully easing on the gas to pulling a trailer loaded with furniture up to Hickory, NC (3 hour trip), it got within 1 mpg difference 9.5 to 10.5 mpg. I took it back several times to the dealer to have it checked. They told me that the computer tells that it was getting about 18 mpg. People that I knew who had one were getting 21 mpg. and at worse 18.
I know that I would be greatly disappointed if my smart only got 20 mpg.
R.F. Stacks November 8, 2009 at 8:43 pm
My gosh! You folks,I guess,have have never seen “Who killed the electric car” and have forgotten the 1.0 Chevy Metro.I own a 1998 1.0 metro and it constantly “Averages” 48 mpg and it has 129,000 miles on the clock,and I love it,it has Air, power brakes and a good radio and has a back seat and has only cost me a set of brake shoes and rotors,which I installed myself in 35 minutes,in the last 8 years. I drive it in the city and on the Interstate and it can run comfortably at 70 mph.Without any doubt it’s the most economical car that we Americans have ever had a chance to own.
Why did GM decide to discontinue it?Easy answer,Not enough mark up and too dependable.everyMetro owner that I have talked with says they like their Metro also.
We will never see a 50mpg car any time soon again.Think about this,what would happen to States and Federal government revenue if all of a suddenly cars got 50mpg?THINK ABOUT IT!
Craig November 22, 2009 at 9:14 pm
My 87′ toyota pickup has 250,000 miles on it and gets 26 city and 30 on the highway, Uhh it’s a pickup. My supercharged 5.0 mustang gets 21 on the highway, although only 18 city. My parents have a scion that gets 37mpg hwy, although I am not sure on that.
I assumed a smart car got 50+ in the US
CJ November 24, 2009 at 11:33 am
Plain and simple, the global warming farce has forced the auto manufacturers to add additional emmision systems to our engines..Go google EGR valve and see what it does, those babies have been around since the 70′s and we just keep adding to it. Cars run hotter and use more fuel to burn off emmisions. I have a 2007 Nissan Versa that barely gets 23 in the city, my wife drives a 2009 Cobalt that averages the same. Thats about what they are rated for. Before you go blaming the auto industry, look at what fuel tax is, the national average is 46 cents per gallon. You think big government is going to want to give that up! I still have my old 91 Ford Festiva with 225,000 miles, that baby still gets 40-50mpg.
jacko December 10, 2009 at 5:36 pm
One reason Euro fuel consumption vs. US is often “too optimistic” is the very simple fact that when converting Liter’s/100KM to MPG, the Europeans often base this on the British Gallon, which has about 5 liters instead of the US 4 (or so)
Simple.
R J Adams December 10, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Jacko – the US gallon differs from the Imperial gallon by 0.7 liters. (3.8 US 4.5 UK). This difference was factored into the original calculations.