Smart cars coming to the US

Eeyore > wrote in
:

>
>
> Jim Yanik wrote:
>
>> Eeyore > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>
>> > Erik Meltzer wrote:
>> >
>> >> most cars have more wheelbase than a Smart is long, even here
>> >
>> > There's a reason for that.
>> >
>> > The Smart car has such a short wheelbase that *any* side impact is
>> > guaranteed to hit at least one axle. This distributes the forces
>> > and makes it much better equipped than most cars in a side impact.
>> > Lower chance of cabin intrusion.
>> >
>> > Graham
>>
>> How reassuring.
>
> It's a damn sight Smarter than having the cabin speared ! In short,
> the Smart car has far better side impact durability by Smart design.
>
> Graham
>


I noted on one Smart site that for the US,the car must be lengthened 7
inches,made heavier,among other changes.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Scott en Aztlán" wrote:

> On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 03:31:10 +0100, Eeyore
> > wrote:
>
> >Jim Yanik wrote:
> >
> >> Eeyore > wrote in
> >> :
> >>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Jim Yanik > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Get a typical "driver" behind the wheel on the freeway,and they
> >> >> >"lose control" and that Smart car is going to roll over quicker than
> >> >> >a cheap ho on a Saturday night "date".
> >> >>
> >> >> are you sure abt this?
> >> >
> >> > It's just typical naysaying.
> >> >
> >> > Graham
> >>
> >> No,short wheelbase autos are far more sensitive to steering inputs than
> >> cars with longer wheelbases.
> >
> >Like go-karts ?
>
> The go-karts I drove as a kid all had a center of gravity
> approximately 12 inches off the ground, making them almost impossible
> to flip.

Exactly !


> The same cannot be said of the Smart.

The Smart car has a very low CG compared to most cars.


> Also, go-karts are
> typically driven at very low speeds - not at 80 MPH in freeway
> traffic.

Go-karts also don't have a protective cage !


> >> That makes them more vulnerable to driver
> >> error,and harder to recover from an error,particularly at higher speeds
> >> such as on freeways. It's plain physics.
> >
> >It's plain driver skill.
>
> I agree that, as the vehicle's center of gravity goes up, the easier
> it is to flip and the more driver skill it requires to keep it from
> flipping.

So look at the CG !

Graham

Jim Yanik wrote:

> I noted on one Smart site that for the US,the car must be lengthened 7
> inches,made heavier,among other changes.

So ? Your country insists on daft measures that don't relate to real safety ?

Please elaborate.

Graham

On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 18:49:01 +0100, Eeyore
> wrote:

>
>
>"Scott en Aztlán" wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 03:31:10 +0100, Eeyore
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Jim Yanik wrote:
>> >
>> >> Eeyore > wrote in
>> >> :
>> >>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Jim Yanik > wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >Get a typical "driver" behind the wheel on the freeway,and they
>> >> >> >"lose control" and that Smart car is going to roll over quicker than
>> >> >> >a cheap ho on a Saturday night "date".
>> >> >>
>> >> >> are you sure abt this?
>> >> >
>> >> > It's just typical naysaying.
>> >> >
>> >> > Graham
>> >>
>> >> No,short wheelbase autos are far more sensitive to steering inputs than
>> >> cars with longer wheelbases.
>> >
>> >Like go-karts ?
>>
>> The go-karts I drove as a kid all had a center of gravity
>> approximately 12 inches off the ground, making them almost impossible
>> to flip.
>
>Exactly !
>
>
>> The same cannot be said of the Smart.
>
>The Smart car has a very low CG compared to most cars.
>
>
>> Also, go-karts are
>> typically driven at very low speeds - not at 80 MPH in freeway
>> traffic.
>
>Go-karts also don't have a protective cage !

Some of the karts I drove in the 60's did 90 mph, and still didn't have a roll
cage.

DPH
>
>
>> >> That makes them more vulnerable to driver
>> >> error,and harder to recover from an error,particularly at higher speeds
>> >> such as on freeways. It's plain physics.
>> >
>> >It's plain driver skill.
>>
>> I agree that, as the vehicle's center of gravity goes up, the easier
>> it is to flip and the more driver skill it requires to keep it from
>> flipping.
>
>So look at the CG !
>
>Graham

Dave Head > wrote in
:

> On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 18:49:01 +0100, Eeyore
m> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"Scott en Aztlán" wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 01 Jul 2006 03:31:10 +0100, Eeyore
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> >Jim Yanik wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Eeyore > wrote
>>> >> in :
>>> >>
>>> >> > wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> Jim Yanik > wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> >Get a typical "driver" behind the wheel on the freeway,and
>>> >> >> >they "lose control" and that Smart car is going to roll over
>>> >> >> >quicker than a cheap ho on a Saturday night "date".
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> are you sure abt this?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > It's just typical naysaying.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > Graham
>>> >>
>>> >> No,short wheelbase autos are far more sensitive to steering
>>> >> inputs than cars with longer wheelbases.
>>> >
>>> >Like go-karts ?
>>>
>>> The go-karts I drove as a kid all had a center of gravity
>>> approximately 12 inches off the ground, making them almost
>>> impossible to flip.
>>
>>Exactly !
>>
>>
>>> The same cannot be said of the Smart.
>>
>>The Smart car has a very low CG compared to most cars.
>>
>>
>>> Also, go-karts are
>>> typically driven at very low speeds - not at 80 MPH in freeway
>>> traffic.
>>
>>Go-karts also don't have a protective cage !
>
> Some of the karts I drove in the 60's did 90 mph, and still didn't
> have a roll cage.
>
> DPH

Shifter karts used in racing do not have a roll cage,except perhaps for
young children's classes.They also hit up to 100 MPH,depending on the track
length.They also spin out,flip or cartwheel spectacularly,when limits are
exceeded.

But the point is,in racing,the drivers pay intense attention to their
driving,while ordinary people on the highways do NOT pay such close
attention.

The point is,short wheelbase autos are far more sensitive to steering
inputs and have less leeway for error,and that is what's going to matter on
the freeways,with real people doing the driving.(not racers or experts)

I also note that the Smart is higher than it is wide,and the occupants sit
up higher.So it may NOT have a "low" COG....with people in it.



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Jim Yanik wrote:

> I also note that the Smart is higher than it is wide,and the occupants sit
> up higher.So it may NOT have a "low" COG....with people in it.

It'll still be a heck of a lot better than any SUV !

Graham

Jim Yanik wrote:

> I noted on one Smart site that for the US,the car must be lengthened 7
> inches,made heavier,among other changes.

All that tells you is how backward US regulations are.

Graham

Erik Meltzer wrote:
> Hi!
>
> N8N wrote:

[snip]

>> I'd consider the Mini far more practical than a Smart,
>
> Only in that it seats four. And there are plenty of more
> practical -- and inexpensive -- cars to do that than a Mini.
>
> Yours,
> Erik.

My experience in MINI is that it's actually two-seater car when two
slightly tall guys sit in the front. All of legroom vanished when they
pulled the seats all the way back to accommodate our long legs. A person
would have to sit transversely in the rear seat or none if we are
carrying luggage.

Jim Yanik wrote:
>
> I noted on one Smart site that for the US, the car must be lengthened 7
> inches, made heavier, among other changes.

Nope, it's common for the manufacturers to 'enlarge' their vehicles
slightly with each generation. It is due to increasing consumer demand
for more and more features as well as increasing requirements for
stronger safety features. They add weight considerably.

One example is the new EU regulations for pedestrian safety which forced
many manufacturers to lengthen or raise the bonnet as to give more
'cushion' space between bonnet and motor. Look at Peugeot 407 with its
awkward-looking front overhang. That is not the reason why Smart car has
to be lengthened for US market.

For example, the new Mercedes-Benz S-Class (W221 body type) is
substantially larger than the outgoing model (W220) it replaced. It's
also true for Volkswagen Golf Mk5 which is much larger than the original
Golf Mk1. The new MINI is much bigger than the original Mini because of
different safety requirements to-day.

Canada has similar safety regulations as US with minor variations in
lighting and labelling requirement, and Smart cars have been selling
there for about a year now.

OM > wrote in :

> Jim Yanik wrote:
>>
>> I noted on one Smart site that for the US, the car must be lengthened 7
>> inches, made heavier, among other changes.
>
> Nope, it's common for the manufacturers to 'enlarge' their vehicles
> slightly with each generation. It is due to increasing consumer demand
> for more and more features as well as increasing requirements for
> stronger safety features. They add weight considerably.

No,this is a REQUIREMENT of the US before the auto may be imported into the
US. It's not any manufacturing change;Mercedes would prefer to bring the
cars in as they are currently made.

>
> One example is the new EU regulations for pedestrian safety which forced
> many manufacturers to lengthen or raise the bonnet as to give more
> 'cushion' space between bonnet and motor. Look at Peugeot 407 with its
> awkward-looking front overhang. That is not the reason why Smart car has
> to be lengthened for US market.

the site I checked did not give a specific reason for the lengthening.
It just said US regs required it.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net