Smart Really Coming to U.S. in 2008

We don’t really believe it, but it seems the Smart brand actually is bringing its next generation ForTwo to the U.S. Last week, the presidents of Smart and the United Auto Group agreed on all the specifics to distribute the Smart brand in the U.S. The two signed an agreement making it all official, and even stated that Smarts will go on sale here in early 2008.

Smart is saying the next ForTwo is “absolutely the right car in the right place at the right time.” However, we’re seeing interest in new subcompacts dwindle along with gas prices and don’t think the Smart will be as alluring as the new Mini Cooper was when it debuted in the U.S. What do you think? Will Smart boom or bust in the States?

Source: DaimlerChrysler/Smart

Comments

some will sell, mostly to high school kids, but for people that actually drive, however, its not going to be a hit. Most people drive the interstate sharing the roads with 18 wheelers, incompetent F250 drivers, buses, etc etc, safety wise its not going to be the smartest (no pun intented) purchase.

I think it looks really cool and I would love to have one to drive back and forth to work in. I have a feeling though the price tag will be a bit much for us everyday folks and teenagers whose parents aren't made of money.

Didn’t this car become passé at least a year ago? Everyone else dropped the original iMac styling long before it even debut.

Also, I think a lot of parents of teenagers would be afraid to put their child in one of these.

The small smart failed to live up to sales expectations in Europe. Why would it suceed in the US?

There are many excellent small cars in Europe (both Golf sized and Yaris sized) that are unavailable here. Smart is not one of them.

The only main advantage to a Smart over a Yaris is parking sideways (infrequent concern in the US). Otherwise there is no reason not to buy a Yaris over a Smart.

The Smart is actually safer than most people think, but it can't escape the label as a glorified golf cart. Nothing fits. Its extremely tiny next to a Golf let alone a F-150.

This is no Mini. I predict BUST unless the new version is significantly different.

If you search other "auto blogs" today you'll find images of the new smart that were leaked. it looks almost identical to the old one, much like how the 2007 mini looks so much like the 2006.

I think the mere fact that you can't do a grocery run with the smart makes it impractical. it is simply made for commuting and in the US you have to commute on big highways. Plus we "live" in our cars. A few weeks of bad habits like leaving cds, empty water bottles etc in the thing and you won't be able to fit a person in the passenger seat.

As long as Crispin Porter Bogusky does the ads for it, Smart will be a hit. They did work for Mini and they made it cool and at the end of the day, it all comes down to marketing.

Low gas prices are an illusion anyway.

I drove one of these in Santa Monica -- gray market, not converted, I think.

Anyway, I have a hard time seeing these being more than a fad for a select group of urban dwellers. Or maybe at the sprawling retirement communities that should be springing up again soon.

Sure, they're visually interesting for now, and they draw crowds the way the New Beetle did early on. But it really does drive like an overgrown, underpowered golf cart.

Maybe I just didn't get on it enough.

Is this only being sold in Metro city downtowns?
Or, is it being sold to the driving schools?

BUST. Too expensive for it to make up for the gas savings. Price it under 6K and maybe ther would be a market.

I think it's going to be bust.
It's too expensive and too small and there's a
safety concern

It will go bust.

This is just not the sort of car that the average American will warm up to... It's plays to the same audience as the old Corbin Sparrow, and how many of those did you see? There may be a few willing to buy a Smart out of principal, and deal with economy car looks and sports car inconvenience. Most folks though like it the other way around, so there will be few takers.

If memory serves me right, when Smart displayed at the Chicago Auto Show a few years back, most of the interest was centered around the ForFour and especially the Roadster. Had Smart kept those two and sold them here, they might have had a chance.

Too bad they won't be bringing the City Coupe to our shores--that has the potential to sell pretty well because of the MINIesque cuteness factor.

Safety seems to be a big concern but isn't. There's a big fat reinforcement ring around the passenger area and a lot of crumple zones. Drive defensively and you've got nothing to worry about. There's a huge myth that larger cars are necessarily safer. More people die because of hubris than auto design--they can't fix the nut behind the wheel.

Depending on price, I'd go for the Roadster/City Coupe given my commute and their better acceleration. My old commute was shorter and any Smart would be a good choice since I usually would take myself 10 miles a day. No real need for a 5-door wagon (which I have) or a big-ass SUV (which I've seen).

I may have goofed on that last post--I was thinking of a Smart I saw on Top Gear that was like an old Nissan Pulsar with the 'wagon' back end of it (and left in the dryer too long) that I thought was called the City Coupe--it may have been the Roadster model instead.

Speaking of Top Gear, both Jeremy and Richard pointed out how slow the semi-auto gearbox shifted. Their bit was funny and apparently true, so hopefully DaimlerChrysler have fixed the issue.

The smart car has been sold in Canada for a few years. I notice that the sales numbers are down resently so the novelty may have worn off.
Actually they seem to do well in crash tests.

I was told by a Smart Car dealer in Seattle the new Smart Cars will be slightly larger than the current ones. They will also have a Mitsubishi drive train instead of the Daimler drive train in the current ones. From what I saw, there is room enough for groceries, contrary to what some might think. They are expensive though.

I lived in Taipei, which is extremely crowded and would seem a perfect city for this car. Yet it was not a big hit. There are other much more practical European compacts.I had a Renault Twingo. Very small but huge inside. room for 4 adults. I am 6"5 and it was comfortable. I also had a daihatsu that was very small and bulletproof.

I saw the Smart Car in Florence, Italy last month, and wondered why they're not all over New York City. I understand what the other posters are saying about freeway driving---I think this is an excellent car for the city dweller where parking is at a premium.

I only WISH that urban dwellers would buy these instead of their stupid "might-as-well-be-clubbing-baby-seals-and-pouring-toxic-waste-into-our-water-supply" Hummers.

As a matter of fact, I think it is your obligation, should you choose to live and park in a major city, to buy the smallest car available. But piggish Americans just LOVE their Escalades and Hummers, even if it means that nobody else can park anywhere.

I met an owner in Canada who liked her Smart. It was a diesel engine that she said delivered up to 80 mpg on highway trips. There was room on the back shelf for her medium sized dog and some room for groceries. As far as comfort, it did not seem too cramped. She preferred driving it at highway speed (smoother ride)as opposed to city driving, unforgiving when hitting potholes). I was shocked by the price and that would be the killer...

Latest information has the price starting at $11k for the base and $15k for the convertible.

For most people, this would be a perfect 2nd commuter car. At least that's would be why I would buy it. It has more "luggage" space than a Mini and gets better gas mileage, then add on that it cost $10k less than a Mini. I think it will be a hit in large cities and smaller college towns. And as mentioned, it will be a hit with those people who don't would rather pay a 1/4 of what they are paying now for filling up their tank every month.

Bring the roadster version back!

AMERICANS INSATIABLE THIRST FOR ENERGY MUST BE MODERATED R2
By YJ Draiman, Energy Development Specialist

As you know, many serious problems are associated with our insatiable thirst for energy. The reason is simple: To gain the energy we must burn the fuels. The combustion, by the way quite inefficient, causes huge gaseous emissions polluting the air and forming an invisible screen responsible for the famous “ green house effect ”, i.e., blocking the dissipation of heat and thus causing the feared warming up of our planet, with deadly consequences for nature and man.
There is only a finite amount of oil in the world. Everybody knows this.
Someday, we'll run out. It will be gone.
Meanwhile, our insatiable thirst for oil -- which we burn -- has put enormous sums of money into the hands of fanatics who hate us and everything we stand for, and who use that oil money to fund the terrorists who murder Jews and Americans wherever they can.
We can't burn oil forever.
And it's bad strategy to base our economy on cheap oil when we have to buy at least some of it from our enemies.
Optimists tell us that the free market will eventually deal with the problem. Their theory is that as oil gets harder to extract cheaply, the price will go up; then other forms of energy will become economically attractive and we'll switch over to them.
Here's why their optimism is nothing short of suicidal.
First, there's no guarantee that without intense government-funded research and financial incentives now, the new energy sources will be available in quantities large enough to replace oil when it does run out.
In other words, if we wait until it's an emergency, our economy could easily crash and burn for lack of energy sources sufficient to drive it.
It's easy to supply energy for an economy that's only a tenth the size of the world's economy today. The question is how many people will die in the resulting chaos and famine, before new free-market equilibrium is established?
Second, how stupid do we have to be to wait until we run out of oil before acting to prevent its waste as a fuel? Petroleum is a vital source of plastics. We could use it for that purpose for hundreds of generations -- if we didn't burn any more of it. But if we wait till we've burned all the cheap petroleum, it won't be just fuel that we have to replace.
Third, market forces don't do anything for our national defense, our national security. We had a clear warning back in the 1970s with the first oil embargo. What if terrorism in the Middle East specifically targets all oil exports, from many countries?
And even if they keep the oil flowing, why are we pumping money into the pockets of militant extremists who want to destroy us? Why are we subsidizing our enemies, when instead we could be subsidizing the research that might set us free from our addiction to oil?
You notice that I haven't said anything about polluting the environment. Because this is not an environmental issue.
In the long run, it's an issue of whether we wish to provide for our children the same kind of prosperity that we've luxuriated in as a nation since World War II.
It is foolish optimism bordering on criminal neglect that we continue to think that our future will be all right as long as we find new ways to extract oil from proven reserves.
Instead of extracting it, we ought to be preserving it.
Congress ought to be giving greater incentives and then creating mandates that require hybrid vehicles to predominate within the next five years.
Within the next fifteen years, we must move beyond hybrids to means of transportation that don't burn oil at all.
Within thirty years, we must handle our transportation needs without burning anything at all.
Predicting the exact moment when our dependence on petroleum will destroy us is pointless.
What is certain is this: We will run out of oil that is cheap enough to burn. We don't know when, but we do know it will happen.
And on that day, our children will curse their forebears who burned this precious resource, and therefore their future, just because they didn't want the government to interfere with the free market, or some other such nonsense.
The government interferes with the free market constantly. By its very existence, government distorts the market. So let's turn that distortion to our benefit. Let's enforce a savings program. But instead of putting money in the bank, let's put oil there.
Oil in the bank ... so our children and grandchildren for a hundred generations can slowly draw it out to build with it instead of burn it.
Oil in the bank ... so we'll be free of the threat of fanatics who seek to murder their enemies -- including us -- with weapons paid for at our gas pumps.
Do you want to know who funded Osama bin Laden? We did. And we continue to do it every time we fill up.
You don't have to be an environmental fanatic to demand that we control our greed for oil.
In fact, you have to be dumb and a fool not to insist on it.
But ... foresight just isn't the American way. We always seem to wait until our own house is burning before we notice there's a wildfire.
Oh, it won't reach us here, we tell ourselves. We'll be safe.
Talk about foolish optimism.
Fair Threat to World Economy But Oil Boycott Improbable
Energy Efficiency Must Be North America’s Priority but Canada and
U.S. Fail on Energy Efficiency Policies
“The despots of the moderate Middle East are non-players save for
their oil in the ground… My concern is that my grand kids might see parts of the
Middle East turned into a nuclear waste land, and Ali Baba and The Forty
Thieves. The world community needs to see a checkmate within the next 60 -
90 days. Failing that, Iran and Syria will be emboldened.” Reiterating an almost
universal view on the panel, this CEO emphasized that the world’s seemingly
The Chinese contribution to the energy crisis
The quest for resources. The dynamic Chinese economy, which has averaged 9 percent growth per annum over the last two decades, nearly tripled the country's GDP, has also resulted in the country having an almost insatiable thirst for oil as well as a need for other natural resources to sustain it. The PRC has been a net importer of petroleum since 1993, and has increasingly relied on African countries as suppliers. As of last year, China was importing approximately 2.6 million barrels per day (bbl/d), which accounts for about half of its consumption; more than 765,000 bbl/d – roughly a third of its imports – came from African sources, especially Sudan, Angola, and Congo (Brazzaville).
To get some perspective on these numbers, consider that one respected energy analyst has calculated that while China's share of the world oil market is about 8 percent, its share of total growth in demand for oil since 2000 has been 30 percent. The much publicized purchase, in January of this year, of a 45 percent stake in an offshore Nigerian oilfield for $2.27 billion by the state-controlled China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) was just the latest in a series of acquisitions dating back to 1993 whereby the three largest Chinese national oil companies – China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC), China Petroleum and Chemical Corporation (Sinopec), and CNOOC, respectively – have acquired stakes in established African operations.
Our insatiable thirst for Middle East energy is “the oil [that] feeds the fire.”
This idea that we can live in a homogenous cul-de-sac suburban development in our plastic homes driving 50 to 100 miles to work in a 4700lb SUV to our middle management job at Bed Bath and Beyond and expect this way of life to just continue on indefinitely with no consequences represents mind boggling ignorance and negligence towards our future. The "American Dream" is a relic of the Baby Boomer generation and will die with our parents and grandparents. To quote author James Kunstler: "Suburban development in this country represents the single largest misallocation of wealth and resources in the history of the planet."

So could a 900 acre photo voltaic array power a major metropolitan grid. No, probably not. But the question isn't how do we squeeze enough energy out of the technology to accommodate our seemingly insatiable thirst for electricity and fuel but rather how do we cut the fat and waste out of our civilization and our lives and actually live WITHIN our environment with some sort of sustainability. There is no one technology that will provide all our solutions. It will have to be a combination of wind turbines, solar and hydroelectric excluding the remote possibility that some new form of energy production (i.e. cold fusion or something equally fantastical) is unleashed on the world by CERN or ET. These power plants will operate primarily at a local level servicing on a much smaller scale than what we here in North America have been so used to in the last 70 or so years.
If the American public's insatiable appetite for automobiles continues, uncurbed by any sense of responsibility, someone must, like a parent with a selfish child, at least start slapping wrists.
Perhaps we should ration gasoline, and insist that all cars meet a miles-per-gallon minimum -- one higher than many sport utility vehicles, for example, achieve now. The rationing would not be a wartime figure, of course, but a reasonable amount allowed for business and pleasure.
Americans consume the largest portion of gas in the world and cry the loudest about the price.
The government should repeatedly increase the price of gasoline in an effort to slow our country's insatiable thirst for oil. Utilize the excess profits and taxes to fund research and rebates for renewable efficiency and renewable energy.
YJ Draiman, Energy Analyst – 6/19/2007

i drove a german version of the smart yesterday here in oklahoma city and have been watching and researching them since i found out about them in april of this year (2007). before anyone posts any more uneducated posts about how it is too expensive or unsafe, you need to do your research. i read above somewhere on here that someone said to make the purchase price $6K - this is simply an ignorant statement as it costs more to produce a car and make a profit. check out these websites for a little more info & crash tests. Go see the Smart ForTwo on tour in a city near you to get the FACTS on this wonderfully innovative, safe, fuel efficient SMART car.

www.smartusa.com

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=117630#2

CRASH TESTING:
http://paultan.org/archives/2006/11/11/5th-gear-smart-fortwo-crash-test/

http://www.whatasmartcar.com/index.php

The time is good for the fortwo. High gas prices are a growingly harsh reality that the general public will be dealing with for some time. I have one on order but will not let my newly minted teenage driver have it because I do worry about him loosing any encounters with SUV's or any larger vehicle. (Let's face it, some motorcyles come close to the fortwo in mass.) I could fit two of these on one side of my garage and keep my larger car on the other side. Regarding safety, the car is well designed and I am impressed by the crash tests. But most of what makes a car safe resides in the driver's care and habits...and it doesn't make sense to upgrade to an 18wheeler or dumptruck as a strategy to avoid dying on a Hummer's bumper. The smart seems to be a reasonable, practical and fun partial solution to some of the problems we are facing. And by the way, it can haul a pretty good load of groceries (unless you shop for a family of 8).

Thanks for creating this great article on the smart, I would like to personally invite you to the new smart site just launched.

The new smart website is focused on the 451 smart fortwo ( 2008 smart car ) and its web address is: http://www.451s.com

451s.com was created to help bring together worldwide smart owners and smart enthusiasts. While this site is focused on the 451 smart fortwo sold in America and Canada it is open to all smart's and the worldwide smart community.

http://www.451s.com

A more efficient and cost effective renewable energy system is needed. R3
A more efficient and cost effective renewable energy system is needed.
To accelerate the implementation of renewable electric generation with added incentives and a FASTER PAYBACK - ROI. (A method of storing energy, would accelerate the use of renewable energy) A greater tax credit, accelerated depreciation, funding scientific research and pay as you save utility billing. (Reduce and or eliminates the tax on implementing energy efficiency, eliminate increase in Real estate Taxes for energy efficiency improvement). Tax incentive and rebates have to be tripled.
In California, you also have the impediment, that when there are an interruption of power supply by the Utility you the consumer cannot use your renewable energy system to provide power.
In today's technology there is automatic switching equipment that would disconnect the consumer from the grid, which would permit renewable generation for the consumer even during power interruption. Energy storage technology must advance substantially. ?Energy conservation through energy storage?.
New competition for the world's limited oil and natural gas supplies is increasing global demand like never before. Reserves are dwindling. These and other factors are forcing energy prices to skyrocket here at home. It's affecting not just the fuel for our cars and homes, it is affecting food prices and it's driving up electricity costs, too. A new world is emerging. The energy decisions our nation makes today will have huge implications into the next century. We must expedite the implementation of renewable energy.
A synchronous system with batteries allows the blending of a PV with grid power, but also offers the advantage of ?islanding? in case of a power failure. A synchronous system automatically disconnects the utility power from the house and operates like an off-grid home during power failures. This system, however, is more costly and loses some of the efficiency advantages of a battery-less system.
We?re surrounded by energy ? sun, wind, water. The problem is harnessing it in an economical way.
YJ Draiman, Northridge, CA
October 5, 2008

YJ Draiman Energy Development Specialist provides expertise in all sectors of the energy and utility industry.
Over 20 years experience. Specializing in: Energy Audit, Telecom audit, Utility bills audit and review for refunds or better rates, Demand Management, Energy Efficiency review and implementation, Renewable Energy, Lighting Retrofit, Solar Energy, Wind Energy, Fuel-Cell, Thermal imaging, Rainwater harvesting, Energy conservation, Ice Storage, Water conservation methods, Energy and telecom audit and procurement.
"Paying for utility costs without using a Utility Auditor and Monitor is like driving a car at night with the lights turned off"
Much is at stake when policy makers, regulators, and corporate executives face the challenges of evolving energy markets and efficiency.

www.energysavers2.com