Friends don't let friends...drive Smart!

The tiny Smart Fortwo is all the rage now that gas prices are closing in on $4 per gallon for regular unleaded in many parts of the US. As you can see, the Smart takes up only about half the space of my 2004 Toyota Camry, a typical modern-day midsize car. The Smart holds only two passengers in relative comfort (there is no rear seat), but there is a fair amount of space behind the front seats to hold cargo.

However, the car didn't do so well in the NHTSA frontal crash tests, with only a 3-star rating for the front passenger (and a 4-star rating for the driver). Almost every car today earns 4 or 5 stars in the frontal test, so 3 stars isn't particularly encouraging. In the NHTSA side impact test, the car earned the maximum of 5 stars, but the driver door unlatched, which increases the possibility of partial or complete occupant ejection if the seat belt is not used.

The car has a rear-mounted 1.0-liter 3-cylinder engine, and is rated by the EPA to achieve 33 mpg in city driving and 41 mpg on the highway. However, premium gas must be used (regular unleaded is allowed only in an emergency, and even then, the tank should only be partially filled). The car weighs only about 1800 lbs and is only 106 inches long, shorter than the wheelbase (front to rear wheel centers) on the Camry!

The Camry, by contrast, holds 5 people in comfort plus has a very roomy trunk. It is 189 inches long and weighs 3142 pounds, with a wheelbase of 107 inches. The 4-cylinder model was originally rated at 23/32 mpg for city/highway driving (since lowered to 20/29 mpg according to the new rules for calculating mileage). However, my mileage is much closer to the EPA's original estimates, and on long highway trips, I achieve a bona fide 35 to 38 mpg. Even in my normal day-to-day commuting, I've been averaging about 28 mpg lately.

In the tougher Insurance Institute for Highway Safety crash tests, the 2004 Camry was rated Good (the highest score) in both the frontal offset and side impact crash tests, the latter when the car was equipped with optional side airbags, as mine has. (The side airbags became standard beginning with 2007 models.)

The Smart is slow to accelerate, and one of its most annoying features according to many reviewers is its automated manual transmission. This is basically a manual transmission that shifts for itself (there is no clutch pedal). The problem is that each shift occurs in a herky-jerky fashion, with the result that occupants' heads and necks are thrown back and forth. Apparently, you can smooth out the shifts by trying to anticipate when a shift will occur by lifting off the gas pedal. This can be hard to predict when a tachometer is not standard equipment and if you aren't familiar with driving a car with a manual transmission!

It seems the best use for this car is in congested city centers where parking is very tight. In New York City, for example, many Manhattan streets have no meters or marked spaces, so if you can squeeze your car in, you're fine (just remember to move it when it's time for street cleaning).

Better small car choices, which offer seating for four or five are the Honda Fit, Toyota Yaris, Nissan Versa, or even the Mini Cooper. If getting the highest possible gas mileage is your priority, then a Toyota Prius is the hands-down winner, with city/highway ratings of 48/45 mpg, on regular gas.

Here are two articles from Edmunds.com on the Smart, one from Karl Brauer, editor-in-chief, on the day-to-day foibles of the car and the other from Lee Scott of the "Strategies for Smart Car Buyers" blog on the safety issue.

My, what big teeth you have!

Not so very long ago, it seemed that cars were becoming more aerodynamic, with lower, sloping hoods and streamlined styling. On some cars, like the 1992 Honda Civic and Ford Crown Victoria, the traditional radiator grille had disappeared, replaced by slots in or underneath the bumper. This was before the SUV craze had reached its boom years in the late 1990s and early 2000s. The SUVs had blocky styling with rectangular grilles. Now that gas prices have shot up and traditional SUVs and pickups have lost some of their popularity, their styling has gone over the top, with huge showy grilles with chrome-plated plastic that dominate their front ends Here are a few of the most outrageous, from top to bottom: Ford F-250 Super Duty, Lincoln Navigator (aggrevator?), GMC Yukon Denali, and finally a passenger car from an automaker that always has featured prominent grilles on its "motorcars," the Rolls-Royce Phantom Drophead Coupe. This last one looks like it has "Groucho Marx" eyebrows over its front lights!

The (not so) good old days

As is well known, all of the former "Big 3" domestic automakers are in trouble currently, losing money in spades, and possibly heading toward bankruptcy. Although the present tailspin began very recently with the runup in gasoling prices and falling sales of traditional SUVs, it's common knowledge that legions of former domestic car buyers have switched their loyalties to the so-called "import" automakers, especially Toyota and Honda, over the last three decades. These companies as well as Nissan, Hyundai, Mercedes, BMW, Mazda, and Mitsubishi have assembly plants here in the United States. Many of these companies build their engines and transmissions here as well, and stamp the body sheet metal.

We're all familiar with horror stories regarding the Big 3's lack of quality and reliability. Most seem to think the downturn in these areas started in the 1970s. However, there were problems well before that; for example in their April 1965 annual auto issue, Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports, complained that their batch of mostly American cars selected for testing exhibited the poorest workmanship in a ten-year slide starting with the 1955 models.

In regard to build quality and reliability, we Americans tolerated a lot back in the 1960s before the imports could compete in the medium and large car field (unless you paid a king's ransom for a Mercedes, and even that was only "compact" size). This was before the often documented maladies of the 70s with the "Rube Goldberg" emissions controls that lowered gas mileage and made cars hard to start and keep running.

My mother's 1967 Chevy Bel Air 2-door sedan was rife with build quality issues, including numerous dents in the body work, a missing dome light bulb, and a driver door that scraped against the A-pillar trim when opened. There was also a "jingle bell" sound that some years later was discovered by my brother to be a loose bolt in the starter.

As for cheapness, granted we didn't have a mainstream Impala (pictured above in idealized splendor) or top-line Caprice, the trunk was totally devoid of any carpeting or trim -- all speckle-painted metal -- what was the point of the bottom of the line Biscayne?

I distinctly remember the automatic choke failing to shut off and the engine backfiring going up inclines within a couple of years of ownership. Rust started to bubble through the quarter panel behind the right rear wheel after just two Pittsburgh winters.

On a cross-country trip in 1971 (starting at 25,000 miles), the water pump failed on the way out and the alternator on the way back. Luckily back then, service stations still provided service; they weren't primarily gas, junk food, and cigarette outlets like today.

Detroit has mainly itself to blame for losing so many of its former loyalists. Let's hope the situation can be turned around, because competition is good for everyone.