CD Article: 2008 Smart Fortwo Passion coupe

[CD_Editor]

Test Drive:


Equipped with snow tires, the rear-wheel drive, rear-engined Smart Fortwo can handle snowy roads and highways easily, says reviewer Norm Mort.  Observed fuel consumption of just over 6.0 L/100 km is "impressive" he says.

 More:
Read the article | View the photos | All The Test Drives

[2latecrew]

One minor drawback is the necessity for Premium fuel.

Is this a joke?

Premium fuel in an $18000 economy car?
Premium fuel in a 70 HP 1 l 3 cyl engine.

From a $ standpoint that's like reducing the fuel economy x% (whatever the price difference is).

Absurd

[quadzilla]

The 1-litre engine has good mid-range torque and you can blow by these rolling behemoths quite quickly.

With a 0-100 km/h of just over 13 seconds, acceleration is not a strong point but I found it more than adequate.

It can blow by transports running at 100-120kph quickly but acceleration isn't a strong point?

In real life driving in and around Toronto that translated into just over 6.0 L/100 km, which is pretty impressive. One minor drawback is the necessity for Premium fuel.

Am I the only person that isn't impressed with "just over 6.0L/100" from a car with only 70hp,1L engine and weighs only 830kg?

[tortoise]

Could it be the effects of winter?

Could it be the switch to the gas engine?

I agree, if fuel economy was a primary concern I'd be looking at a diesel golf rabbit or a Yaris.

[sailor723]

While these cars are cute and look like they might be fun I think there are far more practical econoboxes around for the money.

[2hondas]

Am I the only person that isn't impressed with "just over 6.0L/100" from a car with only 70hp,1L engine and weighs only 830kg?

No.

[Seafoam]

The 1-litre engine has good mid-range torque and you can blow by these rolling behemoths quite quickly.

With a 0-100 km/h of just over 13 seconds, acceleration is not a strong point but I found it more than adequate.

It can blow by transports running at 100-120kph quickly but acceleration isn't a strong point?

In real life driving in and around Toronto that translated into just over 6.0 L/100 km, which is pretty impressive. One minor drawback is the necessity for Premium fuel.

Am I the only person that isn't impressed with "just over 6.0L/100" from a car with only 70hp,1L engine and weighs only 830kg?

 That's 47 miles per gallon in the city. What's wrong with that and it's winter. I wish i got that in the city.

[tpl]

I think a yaris or Fit is a far better car for less or the same money and the difference in cost for fuel is negligible for normal yearly milage.

[rrocket]

^^^^I agree.  I get sub 5L/100 km in the Echo in the summer.

I'm a fan of the Smart though.  But only in convertible...Otherwise..if you are getting the coupe, there are other cars that do the same for less...

[Seafoam]

^^^^I agree.  I get sub 5L/100 km in the Echo in the summer.

I'm a fan of the Smart though.  But only in convertible...Otherwise..if you are getting the coupe, there are other cars that do the same for less...

You get 5L/100km wow that's 56.5 miles per gallon for city driving? That's better than transport Canada's rating for it on the highway.

[rrocket]

No..I get that on the highway.....In the city it's 5.4 ish

Most people I've chatted with on forums who own an Echo get substantially more than what Transport Canada/EPA.  Seems to be the same thing with Corollas and Civis too....


I get right around 50 US MPG highway  42-25 US MPG city....

[jl]

priced too high...
you get more car from getting a Fit or Yaris...for me to buy a car like this...I should be priced at the same level as a Yaris

I guess you pay more for the cool factor...