I just saw my first Smart Car

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Wow, what a dick. I would be pissed if I parked my Suburban there and somebody in a Smart pulled behind me like that.

I think they just did that for the picture. I'm sure the Smart would end up like a crushed can otherwise.

 

[Scaff]

I wish they gave us the first generation. Because they're selling it here, they decided to give it a God-damn automatic. People who want good mileage are beggars, and thus, should not be choosers.

If it came in stick, I'd buy one.

The all have autoboxes, don't be fooled by some of them having paddle shift, its still attached to what is one of the worst autoboxes ever made.

My wife used to drive one that here company had ages ago and it was a nightmare, it is quite honestly around a seconds delay in between gear shifts.

I've also driven the second generation ones as well (actually saw and drove them over in Stuttgart before they were launched) and while the entire back sub-frame, suspension and drivetrain was redesigned, the gearbox is no improvement at all.


Not a great car at all in my opinion, fine if you are the sort of person who 'must' have a quirky car (as my wife's friend who has one is), but beyond that they make very little sense at all.

Regards

Scaff

 

[homeforsummer]

I quite like smart (yes, it's spelled with a small "s") as a brand. I did my final-year dissertation on the company and their advertising and marketing practices.

I don't think I'd ever own a fortwo, there are simply far too many other cars I'd have instead, but I like the concept behind it and the excecution of it, there are a lot of good ideas behind it but it is unfortunate they have some pretty obvious flaws (price, the gearbox etc). I fully expect Mercedes to have to do something drastic when the new Fiat Topolino/BMW Isetta is released in a few years time, as those cars won't be significantly bigger, but will have more power, a proper gearbox and two more seats.

I mourn the passing of the Roadster though, one of my favourite cars full stop. They changed the gearbox software for it so although still not brilliant it was a whole lot better than the fortwo, had more power, was supposed to handle brilliantly, did 60mpg (UK) and because it was produced in such small numbers is sure to become a classic.

I also mourn the fact that the Kimber group have fizzled into nothingness, as they were going to buy the production rights for the Roadie, give it a bigger engine and manual gearbox, and turn it into a modern AC Ace. Could have been the best small sports car since the Elise. Instead, like so many UK consortiums, it came to nothing

 

[Scaff]

I mourn the passing of the Roadster though, one of my favourite cars full stop. They changed the gearbox software for it so although still not brilliant it was a whole lot better than the fortwo, had more power, was supposed to handle brilliantly, did 60mpg (UK) and because it was produced in such small numbers is sure to become a classic.

You forgot one thing about the Roadster, they leak, an issue that still hasn't been fully resolved (I was speaking to a smart/Merc service manager about it only last week).

Apart from that they were much better cars than the ForTwo and I can confirm that they do indeed handle much, much better (not hard as the ForTwo is understeer city - not surprising given the difference in front and rear track widths) and the gearbox software better (but not as good as it needs to be for the rest of the car).


Regards

Scaff

 

[homeforsummer]

You forgot one thing about the Roadster, they leak, an issue that still hasn't been fully resolved (I was speaking to a smart/Merc service manager about it only last week).

Yeah, I was aware of the leaking thing, did a lot of research on them a while ago (unrelated to my dissertation) because I was actually in a position to buy one, which unfortunately is no longer the case. I think most people who've taken them to be re-sealed have seen no further problems, but many un-treated cars have issues. The leaking also didn't seem to affect the roadies with hard-top targa panels as opposed to the roof bars and electric soft top.

The amusing thing was that in all the brochures and promotional bumpf that smart came out with, they kept harping on about re-inventing the classic British sports car... it seems they did, just not in the way they intended!

 

[ExigeEvan]

I also mourn the fact that the Kimber group have fizzled into nothingness, as they were going to buy the production rights for the Roadie, give it a bigger engine and manual gearbox, and turn it into a modern AC Ace. Could have been the best small sports car since the Elise. Instead, like so many UK consortiums, it came to nothing

Yes, there was alot of talk of them bringing production to Port Talbot, only a short journey away from me. Would have been a much needed boost to the local economy with the likes of Ford-Visteon (axle production) constantly cutting jobs.

 

[1X83Z]

Wow, what a dick. I would be pissed if I parked my Suburban there and somebody in a Smart pulled behind me like that.

Tahoe!

 

[YSSMAN]

We were originally supposed to receive the ForFour, but nothing came of that either.

I seem to recall a Top Gear test of the car in which they deemed it "liveable," and I think that here in the US it would stand a far better chance of success than the ForTwo model. People like carrying capacity, and just having the rear seats for friends (or stuff?) would be a major plus. I see that the Wiki page is suggesting that the ForFour may see a debut here, which I suppose isn't a huge surprise, but I do wonder about what kind of price increase would be involved. With the ForTwo already at the price of a Honda Fit Sport (which in my opinion is leagues better), they'll need to find a way to not make this too expensive.

===

Which also makes me wonder, why don't we have this:

Eh? EHHH?

 

[homeforsummer]

I seem to recall a Top Gear test of the car in which they deemed it "liveable," and I think that here in the US it would stand a far better chance of success than the ForTwo model. People like carrying capacity, and just having the rear seats for friends (or stuff?) would be a major plus. I see that the Wiki page is suggesting that the ForFour may see a debut here, which I suppose isn't a huge surprise, but I do wonder about what kind of price increase would be involved. With the ForTwo already at the price of a Honda Fit Sport (which in my opinion is leagues better), they'll need to find a way to not make this too expensive.

I like the ForFour. I like the styling, it has a quality interior, it's a Mitsubishi underneath so it should be reliable, and even the smart semi-auto transmission works better with the bigger engines. And you could get a manual version too, which is even better.

If the Wiki page is suggesting you may see it there then it's vastly out of date, because they stopped producing it maybe two or three years back now. If smart are ever going to make a four-seat car again I'd expect it to be built on a Mercedes platform such as the A-class one. Price wise, the FourFour was I think more expensive than the Mitsubishi Colt it was based on, which is similar in price to the Jazz (Fit) in the UK I think.

The Brabus version was quite tasty:

177bhp and 6.9s to 60. Autoexpress road test

Which also makes me wonder, why don't we have this:

Eh? EHHH?

Not sure. I quite like them (I'm a micro-car fan really) but they feel plasticky as hell inside and probably aren't as refined as the newer smarts on the road, despite them being bigger. And I wouldn't trust my chances at hard cornering in them. The interior is pretty big for such a small car though, I've had a sit in the front and back.

 

[G.T]

Yeah, the ForFour stopped production I think due to the lack of demand. It was expensive for what you got (even more so for the options), had a hard ride and wasn't very refined. I too like the styling though.

 

[MustangSVT]

I quite like smart (yes, it's spelled with a small "s") as a brand. I did my final-year dissertation on the company and their advertising and marketing practices.

I don't think I'd ever own a fortwo, there are simply far too many other cars I'd have instead, but I like the concept behind it and the excecution of it, there are a lot of good ideas behind it but it is unfortunate they have some pretty obvious flaws (price, the gearbox etc). I fully expect Mercedes to have to do something drastic when the new Fiat Topolino/BMW Isetta is released in a few years time, as those cars won't be significantly bigger, but will have more power, a proper gearbox and two more seats.

I mourn the passing of the Roadster though, one of my favourite cars full stop. They changed the gearbox software for it so although still not brilliant it was a whole lot better than the fortwo, had more power, was supposed to handle brilliantly, did 60mpg (UK) and because it was produced in such small numbers is sure to become a classic.

I also mourn the fact that the Kimber group have fizzled into nothingness, as they were going to buy the production rights for the Roadie, give it a bigger engine and manual gearbox, and turn it into a modern AC Ace. Could have been the best small sports car since the Elise. Instead, like so many UK consortiums, it came to nothing

Yes the Roadster is not a bad car. I wouldn't mind driving one myself.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

Wow, what a dick. I would be pissed if I parked my Suburban there and somebody in a Smart pulled behind me like that.

See, i think the Suburban driver is a d!ck! I'm not going to go into all the reasons...it's the typical stuff we've all read and heard about SUVs blah blah blah. I'm so glad SUVs are going out of style in America finally.Hope they die a quick death.

 

[Joey D]

That still doesn't give the Smart car owner the right to park so the Tahoe driver can't get out of the space. Really there is nothing wrong with owning an SUV.

 

[Jondot]

I think it's a shame the ForFour went out of production. As a car it made far more sense than the ForTwo ever did. Far more interesting inside and out than something like a Fiesta (if less inspiring to drive).

The problem with the ForTwo is that it'll always be somewhat of a novelty. You're either admired or laughed at for driving one. There are more refined cars, there are more economical cars, and there are cheaper cars. There's not really a logical reason for owning one (PARTICULARLY in the USA, where you'd just get lost in traffic).

 

[Parnelli Bone]

That still doesn't give the Smart car owner the right to park so the Tahoe driver can't get out of the space. Really there is nothing wrong with owning an SUV.

1. You're assuming the SmartCar driver left his or her car there long enough to inconvenience the Tahoe, and not just to take a silly pic.

2. There's plenty wrong with SUVs, unless you are constantly in the habit of needing to haul large amounts of people (like a gang of kids or a huge carpool or something) or if you own or run a business and actually need to carry lots of stuff all the time.

But see,when i used to commute to work, i would estimate 90% of SUV drivers do not carpool. They do not carry anything other than the driver. Instead, you'd see this giant Yukon or Grand Cherokee or Hummer sitting there in gridlock...with only one occupant--the driver. And that is just wrong. 👎 Does it really take 3 or 4 tons of steel (and god knows how much fuel) just to get to work? To get a coffee? To go grocery shopping?

One could make the same argument about the majority of cars, of course, since cars also burn fossil fuels..however, SUVs are a blatant display of excess....mostly unnecessary...and many of them burn alot more fuel than the average car, not to mention the put additional damage and strain on roads (more than the average car).

I personally would love to own something that doesn't burn fossil fuels. And that's my long-term goal..to eventually get & mod a diesel to run as an SVO. Therefore, i'll be putting my money where my mouth is. My current car has a 2.6 liter 4-banger in it; i've hauled groceries, friends, family, etc. and i've never felt i needed anything bigger than what i have.

But anyways, i'll shut up..i wanna hear your side of the argument..why is there nothing wrong with owning an SUV?

 

[Jim Prower]

The thing about a lot of the commuters is that, half the time, that vehicle's not JUST used to commute. There's a few times that they'll use it to take the family to Grandma's, or on vacation, or a weekend trip. Not that this is nothing the average Minivan couldnt' handle.

However, sometimes they have a trailer with ATVs or Jet Skis: that's pretty common 'round here, where we have a major river nearby. (EDIT: And a Primarily Blue-Collar population) Minivans..well, they can tow, but not that well. You tend to also see the big pickups, too...You can kinda tell the size of the family 'round here by the choice of either pickup or SUV. Single cab, single man. Crew cab, married, two kids. SUV...either the wife's vehicle, or more kids. or both. HD truck typically means the guy or someone he knows owns a plot of land that needs to be worked.

But you can bet that if said vehicle has a luxury badge on it, or even a "lux-ree" badge (or DUB wheels) It's just bought because the person wants to keep up with the Joneses...or the Playahs, depending on which side of town they live on.

and I realized I just took this thread further off topic.

 

[Joey D]

1. You're assuming the SmartCar driver left his or her car there long enough to inconvenience the Tahoe, and not just to take a silly pic.

I'm just going by what the photo shows, I'm not going to make assumptions other then what is presented. Facts > Faith.

2. There's plenty wrong with SUVs, unless you are constantly in the habit of needing to haul large amounts of people (like a gang of kids or a huge carpool or something) or if you own a business and actually need to carry lots of stuff all the time.

But see,when i used to commute to work, i would estimate 90% of SUV drivers do not carpool, however. Instead, you'd see this giant Yukon or Grand Cherokee or Hummer sitting there in gridlock...with only one occupant--the driver. And that is just wrong. 👎 Does it really take 3 or 4 tons of steel (and god knows how much fuel) just to get to work? To get a coffee? To go grocery shopping?

One could make the same argument about the majority of cars, of course, since cars also burn fossil fuels..however, SUVs are a blatant display of excess....mostly unnecessary...and many of them burn alot more fuel than the average car, not to mention the put additional damage and strain on roads (more than the average car).

I personally would love to own something that doesn't burn fossil fuels. And that's my long-term goal..to eventually get & mod a diesel to run as an SVO. Therefore, i'll be putting my money where my mouth is. My current car has a 2.6 liter 4-banger in it; i've hauled groceries, friends, family, etc. and i've never felt i needed anything bigger than what i have.

But anyways, i'll shut up..i wanna hear your side of the argument..why is there nothing wrong with owning an SUV?

- You have zero right to tell people what they should be doing with their money. If they want an SUV then there is nothing wrong with it. There is no effect on your life because of it.

- Just because you see one person in the vehicle at the time doesn't mean they don't have a flock of kids back home and they need the SUV to carry them around. Maybe the have a boat or are a weekend warrior in the outdoors. You can't assume what people are doing with their vehicles based on one time seeing them. It's not economical viable to have an SUV for those purposes and a small commuter car.

**Tree'd by Jim on that one!

- SUV's don't burn that much more fuel then the average car, they get a few mpg's less than a mid-sized vehicle. It's not what you drive but how you drive it. A 5.3L V8 Tahoe gets 14/20mpg, a 3.5L Impala get 18/28...that's not a huge difference in the grand scheme of things. Drive the Tahoe easier and I bet those numbers will go up since the EPA estimated fuel economy is typically wrong. People have the common misconception that all SUV's get 2mpg and are Hummers. Yes they get worse mileage, but it's not hurting you...you aren't filling them up.

- If you think SUV's are point then you must think all sports cars are pointless as well. Is that a fair to say?

- SUV's don't cause increased damage or stress to the road. Roads are built to handle semi trucks for goodness sakes.

Look I drive one of the smallest and most efficient vehicles on the road in America and I have no problem with SUV's. I have problem with stupid drivers though but they can be behind the wheel of anything. I've seen just as many d-bags in Tahoe's as I've seen in Camry's and Civic's.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

- You have zero right to tell people what they should be doing with their money. If they want an SUV then there is nothing wrong with it. There is no effect on your life because of it.

Forget about me and my opinion for a sec, okay? Think about the planet. Think about the direction we should be going in as civilizations. SUVs are the wrong direction. Fossil-fuel burning vehicles (in general) are the wrong direction if you ask me...i believe all of us should at least start moving away from them one by one in whatever way we can...but SUVs are the most obvious excess that should go first.

- Just because you see one person in the vehicle at the time doesn't mean they don't have a flock of kids back home and they need the SUV to carry them around.

Nope, when i needed to commute on an actual highway, the fact is i'd see many individuals in SUVs, giant trucks, and "mini"vans. By themselves. I'd see them day in and day out. Do they really need 3 or 4 tons of material to transport them? No. The same job can be done by a much smaller vehicle.

Now i'm not saying that these same people never use the 5 to 9 extra seats in their elephantine vehicles, and to any out there who actually use their extra space well by carpooling or whatnot, more power to 'em. My point is the majority of folks driving these vehicles do so in a wasteful fashion.

Maybe the have a boat or are a weekend warrior in the outdoors. You can't assume what people are doing with their vehicles based on one time seeing them. It's not economical viable to have an SUV for those purposes and a small commuter car.

..then why not have just the smaller commuter car?

- SUV's don't burn that much more fuel then the average car,

Ooookay.....guess all the stuff we've been reading about SUVs from multiple news & automotive sources for YEARS is all wrong, eh? SUVs are the most efficient vehicles to purchase, and if you're driving a Saturn SL1, sell it as soon as you can so you can get better mileage with the latest Expedition. Got it.

they get a few mpg's less than a mid-sized vehicle. It's not what you drive but how you drive it. A 5.3L V8 Tahoe gets 14/20mpg, a 3.5L Impala get 18/28...that's not a huge difference in the grand scheme of things. Drive the Tahoe easier and I bet those numbers will go up since the EPA estimated fuel economy is typically wrong. People have the common misconception that all SUV's get 2mpg and are Hummers. Yes they get worse mileage, but it's not hurting you...you aren't filling them up.

- If you think SUV's are point then you must think all sports cars are pointless as well. Is that a fair to say?

There's a difference between someone who drives a sports car for fun and not as a daily commuter. Most people do not drive sports cars anymore...case in point: many sports cars and coupes went out of fashion or were discontinued in the 90's and new millenium as SUVs started to dominate the market.

- SUV's don't cause increased damage or stress to the road. Roads are built to handle semi trucks for goodness sakes.

Correct. However, the given number of "trucks" on the road used to be mostly that: just the semis. There were more lighter cars and not so many giant SUVs The fact that personal trucks, SUVs, and "mini"vans have flooded the market adds to stresses placed on the road. The average weight of personal vehicles (not just SUVs) has also raised by several hundred pounds in the last 20 years...in this respect, SUVs aren't the only culprit.

Look I drive one of the smallest and most efficient vehicles on the road in America and I have no problem with SUV's. I have problem with stupid drivers though but they can be behind the wheel of anything. I've seen just as many d-bags in Tahoe's as I've seen in Camry's and Civic's.

Sure. Stupid people are on bicycles as well. They're everywhere.

Personally, i'm just tickled SUV owners are feeling the heat....that they actually have to think about their situation> "Jeez, i've got this giant bohemoth-vehicle that i used to feel safe in. Now it's cutting into my budget! But OMG) I can't sell it! Nobody's buying them right now! Looks like i'm stuck!"

These same people are blaming whoever they can for $4 a gallon gas. They want gas cheap again. They (for the most part) don't care about conservation...they don't think about what they can do to rectify their situation..they think a magic wand should wave somewhere so they can have gas cheaper again. Well, it aint gonna happen. It makes me happy to see these wasteful character squirm.

And this goes for all of us....what are we all gonna do about our situation (in America, anyways...Europeans and Asians have already figured out plenty of solutions). Personally, i've got a car, but i've also been biking & bussing to work for years. In fact right now, i have a choice of biking or walking to work. I'm lucky.

A couple years back, i finished an oil change on a Denali or something. My boss said to me something like

"now that's what you should be driving!" And i said

"forget it. I hate those giant SUVs. I hate the way they plod along on the road, i hate the way i always feel like i'm about to hit something as i pilot them into my bay. I sometimes worry that one day my lift will break as i try and get it in the air"

My boss said: "If you had one for a week, i bet you'd change your mind".


..which i just found typical of the way some people (not all of them...some of them) who own these think (or don't think is more like it). Me me me...i need to have 6,000 pounds to transport me around, just to get me to Starbucks. It makes absolutely no sense.

 

[Joey D]

The planet isn't going to be harmed because people are driving around SUV's, there is way more to global warming then the burning of fossil fuels. How long have we been burning them? 200 years at the most. There isn't enough data and to much disagreement for me to accept that vehicles are causing our planet to get hot. With that said you still have zero right to tell people what they should be buying. You don't like SUV's, that's fine, but that doesn't mean people should just crush them and buy little cars.

I find it extremely amusing too how you think people don't drive sports cars anymore and how they were discontinued in the 90's. What are millions of American males pining over right now? The new Camaro and Challenger. There is a horsepower war going on between all the manufactures as well. We are getting cars like the GT-R, the Corvette ZR-1, the insane contraptions from the Germans and Swedes, etc. Sports cars or sporty cars rather are still very much alive and kicking throughout the world...and the price of fuel isn't going to cap that.

You really shouldn't care what anyone else drives buy yourself since last time I check America was still a somewhat fair country.

 

[Parnelli Bone]

The planet isn't going to be harmed because people are driving around SUV's, there is way more to global warming then the burning of fossil fuels. How long have we been burning them? 200 years at the most. There isn't enough data and to much disagreement for me to accept that vehicles are causing our planet to get hot.

So the solution is...what? Keep on polluting? Keep on burying our heads in the sand? Business as usual? When you have a problem (and we do have major ones), the best thing is to start trying to fix it.

With that said you still have zero right to tell people what they should be buying. You don't like SUV's, that's fine, but that doesn't mean people should just crush them and buy little cars.

I have a right to post my opinion just like you do. that's what we're doing. This is an internet message board, after all.

I find it extremely amusing too how you think people don't drive sports cars anymore and how they were discontinued in the 90's.

So what exactly happend to the Supra in the 90's? What happend to the MR2? What happened to the Camaro/Firebird line-up? 3000GT? Why did production on these (and other) models die off during a time when production of SUVs climbed?

What are millions of American males pining over right now? The new Camaro and Challenger. There is a horsepower war going on between all the manufactures as well. We are getting cars like the GT-R, the Corvette ZR-1, the insane contraptions from the Germans and Swedes, etc. Sports cars or sporty cars rather are still very much alive and kicking throughout the world...and the price of fuel isn't going to cap that.

It remains to be seen how well all these new models will actually sell in America, JoeyD. $4 a gallon gas is still a relatively new thing...and most of the models you've listed above (except the ZR-1)aren't even on the market yet. Will people buy them? Sure, some will. But personally, i'd hate to be one of the executives over at GM or MOPAR, losing sleep every nite as i worry about making a profit on these new models.

You really shouldn't care what anyone else drives buy yourself since last time I check America was still a somewhat fair country.

Fair enough. Problem is, i actually happen to think about the world around me. I have problems ignoring it. That's what most people do...ignore.

....geez, what happened to the silly, happy vibe of our SmartCar thread? I'll shut up now, i promise.

 

[Sage]

This is not the place to argue environmentalism – please do it in the Opinions forum.

 

[1X83Z]

2. There's plenty wrong with SUVs, unless you are constantly in the habit of needing to haul large amounts of people (like a gang of kids or a huge carpool or something) or if you own or run a business and actually need to carry lots of stuff all the time.

We have three SUVs... only two are in Colorado... we do not haul large amounts of people, we do not run a business that involves carrying lots of things; we have little need for the vehicle's dimensional capacities.

But this was winter '05:

We got four feet in a week. The snow was so bad they were using loaders to shovel it into public parks. At the time we had a Toyota Camry and the car was out of commission for two weeks; we couldn't even get it out of our driveway. It was replaced with an SUV four months ago. No looking back; no regrets. Understand that not everywhere has the mild winters of the mid-Atlantic

It looks to me like the Smart photo was taken in British Columbia. Lots of snow up there... Tahoe vindicated

 

[Tornado]

why is there nothing wrong with owning an SUV?

Because outlawing them would be socialism. Or, perhaps more accurately, fascism. If you don't like them for X, that is fine. But some people may not care about X, and you have no right to force them to.

 

[YSSMAN]

I know they offer an AWD version of the Nissan Micra/March, and as I recall, they were supposed to be developing a crossover-like version of the smart car for the US market as well.

Hmmm.

Which reminds me, they're making an AWD Cooper too. Really, although it may be a niche market, in places like Colorado or Michigan where snow can be a bit excessive at times, light-duty AWD cars with good fuel efficiency should (in theory) sell well.

 

[Joey D]

The AWD Cooper is still a bit of a rumour. The Crossman SUV thing that's going to be shown at Paris presumably will be AWD though.

 

[socomplayer2]

In new jersey I have just started seeing smart cars at the beggining of the summer in very limited numbers (I saw 2 different ones once or twice). But now I am in Atlanta for a month and I see like 5 a day, I guess it depends on where you live.

 

[Formula1Driver]

I remember seeing Smart cars popping up a few years ago, one in a near by neighbourhood and a few around the city.

 

[Kylehnat]

Not a great car at all in my opinion, fine if you are the sort of person who 'must' have a quirky car (as my wife's friend who has one is), but beyond that they make very little sense at all.

I live in a ridiculously liberal (oh wait, "progressive") area with lots of hippie-yuppies, and all I hear is: "I want a Smart car. That's what this country needs". I guess people think they get 1000 mpg, and shoot rainbows out of the tailpipe. When I see one, all I think is "deathtrap". How is it that Smart is regarded as the automotive savior? It really makes no sense.

 

[McLaren]

So what exactly happend to the Supra in the 90's? What happend to the MR2? What happened to the Camaro/Firebird line-up? 3000GT? Why did production on these (and other) models die off during a time when production of SUVs climbed?

Ok, so the sports cars from the 90's are dead. What's your excuse for the sports cars that have been in the last 7 years of this century? Ferrari, Lamborghini, & Porsche have no problem selling cars that are just as pointless as a SUV since they require even more fuel, and get terrible MPG.

BTW, no American companies are losing that much sleep on their SUVs. Our dealers in Texas have no problems moving the Expeditions or Tahoes off their lots.

 

[YSSMAN]

I live in a ridiculously liberal (oh wait, "progressive") area with lots of hippie-yuppies, and all I hear is: "I want a Smart car. That's what this country needs". I guess people think they get 1000 mpg, and shoot rainbows out of the tailpipe. When I see one, all I think is "deathtrap". How is it that Smart is regarded as the automotive savior? It really makes no sense.

When people ask me about them I always say they cost too much and really aren't that fuel-efficent. I mean, sure, if you lived in downtown Grand Rapids the car may be of some benefit to you (the parking situations are TERRIBLE!). But I always tell everyone that the Honda Fit or Toyota Yaris are in fact better cars. You get more for your money, as in space and carrying capacity, and in fact they're just as fuel efficent as well. Certainly, as well, the stigma against premium fuel in the car is usually discussed, which leads many of them to simply say "Whats the point?"

And then I reply, "Well, someone wanted to make money."