SMART to the U.S.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 01:53 PM
  #46  
oscar_a_wiggy's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
that crash test video is a load a crap. do you see any test dummies inside? do you see an accelerometers mounted anywhere to record impact data. did you notice it did not hit straight on? this is NOT a test based on technical data. its a bunch of goofs running the car into a concrete wall. the guy that looks over the car afterwards is an idiot...."well lookee here mate, i can even open and close the passenger door". well whoopde do. can he tell me what would have happened to the occupants inside? NO! can he tell me what injuries they would have sustained? NO! any crash data? NOPE! NONE!

as mentioned before.... nothing but a bunch of goofs smashing up a car.

do they have any real crash data on this car?


oaw
 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 01:59 PM
  #47  
vader716's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,079
Likes: 0
From: Pikesville, MD
Originally Posted by oscar_a_wiggy
that crash test video is a load a crap. do you see any test dummies inside? do you see an accelerometers mounted anywhere to record impact data. did you notice it did not hit straight on? this is NOT a test based on technical data. its a bunch of goofs running the car into a concrete wall. the guy that looks over the car afterwards is an idiot...."well lookee here mate, i can even open and close the passenger door". well whoopde do. can he tell me what would have happened to the occupants inside? NO! can he tell me what injuries they would have sustained? NO! any crash data? NOPE! NONE!

as mentioned before.... nothing but a bunch of goofs smashing up a car.

do they have any real crash data on this car?

oaw
Well that test was legitimate. It is a brutal crash...a 40mph offset crash.

However the crew cab (built on the expedition frame) did not have the same results. They were much better.

Because of those test results our trucks are much safer now.
 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 02:29 PM
  #48  
Raoul's Avatar
Certified Goat Breeder
25 Year Member
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 6,182
Likes: 19
From: the moral high ground
Originally Posted by kobiashi
DC just announced today. They totally dropped the ball on this one. They should have brought it out 5 years ago when they first planned to....
I agree on both counts.
They won't be able to build them fast enough.
 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 02:36 PM
  #49  
F150Europe's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 558
Likes: 0
From: The Netherlands
From a 2 years old article.

"But what about the safety question? Americans believe the best way to survive an accident is to have a large, heavy car. Will U.S. buyers plunk down money for a car that is small and clad in plastic body panels?

First of all, Keogh said, the car will be built with Mercedes technology, known for its safety innovations. Every car will have stability and traction control, ABS and BrakeAssist. They will also have front and side airbags and a protective seating system. But the core of the car's safety is provided by the smart's "tridion safety cell," an extremely strong steel structure that prevents anything from intruding into the cabin. This safety cell is designed to work in conjunction with the seats, the seatbelts and the airbags."

http://www.edmunds.com/advice/specia...1/article.html
 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 02:41 PM
  #50  
kobiashi's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 873
Likes: 1
From: Somewhere in the EU
Originally Posted by oscar_a_wiggy
that crash test video is a load a crap. do you see any test dummies inside? do you see an accelerometers mounted anywhere to record impact data. did you notice it did not hit straight on? this is NOT a test based on technical data. its a bunch of goofs running the car into a concrete wall. the guy that looks over the car afterwards is an idiot...."well lookee here mate, i can even open and close the passenger door". well whoopde do. can he tell me what would have happened to the occupants inside? NO! can he tell me what injuries they would have sustained? NO! any crash data? NOPE! NONE!

as mentioned before.... nothing but a bunch of goofs smashing up a car.

do they have any real crash data on this car?


oaw
OAW . . . you're really USAFPATRIOT1, aren't you.
 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 02:57 PM
  #51  
Raoul's Avatar
Certified Goat Breeder
25 Year Member
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 6,182
Likes: 19
From: the moral high ground
I don't understand the hostility toward the vehicle.

1) You dont' have to ride in it.

2) Everyone with a need for vehicle transportation will get something. Be it a 60mpg Smart car or 9mpg SuperDuty Dualie.

3) Gas prices hover around $3 nationwide and we are constantly being told it is simply because of Supply and Demand'.

We should applaud this vehicle and welcome it.
The people who buy it lessen the 'Demand' part of "Supply and Demand" and that helps the gas guzzling trucks owners.

In an accident, your truck against this car versus perhaps your truck against against another truck.

You should thank anyone who drives anything that gets better gas mileage than you. They are doing you a favor.

What is the downside here?
I just don't see it.
 

Last edited by Raoul; Jun 29, 2006 at 02:59 PM.
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 03:05 PM
  #52  
kobiashi's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 873
Likes: 1
From: Somewhere in the EU
Originally Posted by Raoul
What is the downside here?
I just don't see it.
Probably becasue the company is not owned by Ford.
 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 03:10 PM
  #53  
Raoul's Avatar
Certified Goat Breeder
25 Year Member
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 6,182
Likes: 19
From: the moral high ground
Originally Posted by kobiashi
Probably because the company is not owned by Ford.
I took those blinders off a while back.
 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 03:11 PM
  #54  
Smeezy 05 Screw's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
From: Mormon-ville
Originally Posted by kobiashi
Probably becasue the company is not owned by Ford.
yup, and like how a computer is not a computer unless it is a mac

 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 03:25 PM
  #55  
Josiah's Avatar
Senior Member
Truck of the Month
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,494
Likes: 1
From: Northern CA
Originally Posted by Raoul
I don't understand the hostility toward the vehicle.

1) You dont' have to ride in it.

2) Everyone with a need for vehicle transportation will get something. Be it a 60mpg Smart car or 9mpg SuperDuty Dualie.

3) Gas prices hover around $3 nationwide and we are constantly being told it is simply because of Supply and Demand'.

We should applaud this vehicle and welcome it.
The people who buy it lessen the 'Demand' part of "Supply and Demand" and that helps the gas guzzling trucks owners.

In an accident, your truck against this car versus perhaps your truck against against another truck.

You should thank anyone who drives anything that gets better gas mileage than you. They are doing you a favor.

What is the downside here?
I just don't see it.
I think it's because "a bunch of goofs" are attempting to pass this car as "safe" in one form or another. I don't buy it, especially seeing the way it reacts to what I'd consider an underweight vehicle collision. A pinball machine was the first thing that came to mind viewing that video, I don't think a human would fair too well in an impact as such.

Your points are valid Raoul and I may set foot in one, one day. It's basically a motorcycle with a crash test rating and similar gas mileage, if they legalize tint I'd seriously consider one
 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 03:44 PM
  #56  
kobiashi's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 873
Likes: 1
From: Somewhere in the EU
Originally Posted by Smeezy 05 Screw
yup, and like how a computer is not a computer unless it is a mac

I own a PC. For bidness they are great. (It helps when all of the real word uses PC for you to have one too. Also, no doubt that there are a lot of programs (general and specific) that just are not available on the Mac).

I just prefer Macs. (Plus, I'll cop to being a Mac Zealot most of time)
 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 03:45 PM
  #57  
kobiashi's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 873
Likes: 1
From: Somewhere in the EU
Originally Posted by Josiah
. . . if they legalize tint I'd seriously consider one
What means you "legalize tint"?
 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 03:47 PM
  #58  
Raoul's Avatar
Certified Goat Breeder
25 Year Member
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 6,182
Likes: 19
From: the moral high ground
Yeah I'd consider it too.
Motorcycles aren't practical in inclement weather.
As far as Safety, that boogey man has a lot of people spooked.
Been driving 34+ years.
Rear ended three times, I was stopped each time.
I've dodged many a near-miss.

Some people are better equipped to drive the traffic.
Some people will only purchase tanks.

I don't know if it's because it's not a Ford or jealousy of that 60mpg.
I know I'm getting sick of seeing those $65 gas charges every week.

Live and let live.
 
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 03:56 PM
  #59  
Justis01's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
I did a google search on this car and the more I read about it, the more I like it

Oh yeah, I think somebody on this board already has one, but won't admit to it....hmmm, wonder who that could be???

 

Last edited by Justis01; Jun 29, 2006 at 04:15 PM.
Reply
Old Jun 29, 2006 | 04:24 PM
  #60  
EnglishAdam's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
From: Houston and Lil ol' England
Hmmm, check out this colour scheme. I might get one and keep it in the back of the Harley for emergency purposes.

Can you get a blower for these?

 
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:18 PM.