Smart ForTwo Tops Cars.com Best Bang for Your Buck List

We’ve crunched some numbers and come out with our latest Best Bang for Your Buck list of affordable rides. The list factors in the base price of a new car plus the cost of filling it up for eight years. We used an average gas price of $3.40  — which just a month ago was the national average  — and a projected 15,000 miles driven per year, 55% city, 45% highway.

The results had the Smart ForTwo on top with a lifetime cost of $23,863. Less than $5,000 separated our top 10 list, which also includes the Toyota Yaris, Nissan Versa and Honda Fit.

We also have a separate list for hybrids. All five of the top hybrids had a more expensive lifetime cost than any of our top 10 traditional gasoline-powered vehicles. Check out the full list here.

Comments

This figure is only true if all the drivers did was just to drive alone and maybe with a single passenger.

Often, people have more than 1 person and carry stuff. Echo/Yaris is much more practical. Also, where do you service SmartForTwo. There is also a safety issue. On youtube, there are videos of this car's crash tests. It doesn't look pretty. Although, any subcompact cars' crash don't look pretty.... SmartForTwo was particular disturbing on TopGear Crash Test. Some of the videos were decent but most of Smart's Crash test weren't.

I just can't think this is a progress... If you had a computer... would you call a computer a progress that had slower processor, lower memory, smaller screen, and with less software and hardware that cost more?

I think Toyota Yaris, Honda Civic, Nissan Sentra, and Hyundai Accent present better values.

The one thing that totally throws all the numbers out of wack is "Base Sticker Price". You never buy at sticker price and you're not comaring apples to apples. One vehicles base price may have options. I know you need a base figure to base your numbers on but how about comparing prices based on comparibly equipped vehicles? This would be about $13K for the Yaris and $15k for the Fortwo.

The problem with this and past 'faux' analysis is the reviewer never matched feature-to-feature. So a manual transmission gas vehicle is held up in comparison to the automatic transmission hybrids. More to the point, the standard options on hybrids, which come loaded even in their basic editions, are quite above the stripped, econo-boxes.

Still, if you succeed in sending future buyers to gas only vehicles, the hybrid prices won't go up so fast and we'll all be happy.

Bob Wilson

I't nice to know that some non-hybrid vehicles get a better bang for the buck than hybrids. It takes out a lot of the hype about "saving money" in buying a hybrid.

If we did "comparably equipped" it would be a pretty figure. And a lot of people looking for strict economy get the stripped models. In the end base price is the simplest way to go.

Russell: Smart crash tests by the IIHS will be released early tomorrow.

Dave - try to find a stripped model. Good luck!
Let's try sticking to the real world and what you can actually buy on a lot.

Does anyone know the reason why Smart doesn't bring the roadster model to the US also? I would be much more inclined to buy that than the ForTwo.

You cannot get a Smart for less than MSRP as they are sold out for the next year or so. In that regard, a Yaris or Corolla or Aveo would probably match up or exceed the Smart. I understand your need to keep the comparison "true", but it is not entirely accurate considering market conditions.

Finally, comparing apples-apples hybrids come with much more in the way of equipment. Even comparing a Prius to a Corolla is no accurate as one is a mid-size and the other is a compact while the Prius comes with plenty of features the Corolla does not, hybrid drivetrain notwithstanding.

ziggy,
you can search Cars.com's inventory of new cars and find plenty of stripped models when it comes to mass market vehicles like these. Trust me they exist. We're not talking BMWs here.

Dave-
I took your advice and searched my local inventory and checked out the 10 cars listed. Did not find any listed for the base price you have listed here. In fact the closest was an Accent for 11,480. Most were about $1,500 over base which is what I see all the time I visit car lots. You must be referring to your large market (Chicago) when you say that they exist. It's strange ... Chevy did not want to list any inventory and wanted you to get a quote. Must be ploy to get your email address and bug the hell out of you.

First question is: Did you guys factor in the fact that the smart uses premium fuel instead of regular?

Ziggy,
Remember we do not include Destination charges when discussing car prices on Cars.com and list that separately. Advertised prices on Cars.com will include them. They're usually $500-$800 depending on the car.

I did a quick search and found many scion xDs for the base price plus destination charges. only a handful of honda fits though and yes it could be the area.

I wonder why you had a problem searching Chevy. I didn't. Although I found a $32K Aveo in Indiana!
http://www.cars.com/go/search/detail.jsp;?tracktype=newcc&searchType=49&pageNumber=0&numResultsPerPage=50&largeNumResultsPerPage=0&sortorder=descending&sortfield=PRICE+descending%2cDISTANCE+ascending&certifiedOnly=false&criteria=K-%7cE-%7cM-_9_%7cD-_7214_%7cN-Y%7cR-30%7cI-1%7cP-PRICE+descending%2cDISTANCE+ascending%7cQ-descending%7cZ-60622&aff=national&paId=247655444&recnum=0&leadExists=true

J,
Yes we did factor that into the price although premium is recommended not required on the Smart ForTwo.

This is an interesting study, but is sorely lacking two important factors. Only after you figure in the largest cost of ownership, depreciation, plus the cost of insurance, do you get a true picture of bang for your buck. The Prius has outstanding resale value, and that automatically puts it at the top of the bang for your buck category. Almost all the other cars mentioned (Civic, Yaris, Corolla, etc. will have better resale value than the Smart. As far as insurance goes, Smart drivers are not going to fare well in real world crashes, and I would expect insurance rates for that vehicle to go sky high once they've paid out on a few accidents.

Red,
We have a 5-year cost of ownership tool that does take into account depreciation and repair costs but doesn't go out as far as 8 years. This was a different sort of snapshot.

Red, how do you know what the resale value on a Smart is? Or the insurance rates? And the IIHS tests indicate it scored well in crash tests, where do you come up with the idea that those involved won't fare well? What if they are only bought by city drivers and there are only (or pretty close) low speed collisions?

Red, how do you know what the resale value on a Smart is? Or the insurance rates? And the IIHS tests indicate it scored well in crash tests, where do you come up with the idea that those involved won't fare well? What if they are only bought by city drivers and there are only (or pretty close) low speed collisions?

Ok, so you don't want to compare like equipped hybrids and gas cars ... we can live with that. For example, what is the two-seater hybrid that compares to the "Smart"?

Well then, how about comparing the 'pimped out' econobox to the stripped econobox. After all, all those neat features like automatic transmission, electric doors, alloy wheels, spoilers ... all have some payback, right?

No these 'faux' analysis are comparing apples to oranges and only proving they are not worth the wasted time and electrons used to make them. Either compare like-to-like or get serious and include bicycles, walking shoes and bus tickets.

Bob Wilson

Dave T, I acknowledge the complexities of trying to project your formula out 8 years, but I checked the Kelly Blue Book site and they list a 2001 Prius in excellent condition at $12,300 - I would assume the newer body style will do event better. I think you could make some pretty safe assumptions about the value of these cars after 8 years and then do a formula of original sticker price, minus retained value, plus gasoline and insurance costs to come up with cost of ownership (not that I'm trying to make more work for you). The IIHS report on the Smart was spun in a positive way by much of the mainstream media, but if you read the full report it is sobering indeed. True, the Smart will fare well in collisions with similar size cars. Since the Smart weighs hundreds of pounds less than a Mini, the scenario of it colliding with a similar size car will play out exactly..never. The IIHS report was a cautionary tale to anyone considering a Smart and the authors openly voiced their concerns about the Smart in the real world. The lack of crush space in the front means they have built the passenger cage to be extremely rigid so it doesn't deform in a crash. That means the car will bounce off larger vehicles, causing two major problems: 1) the "G" forces on your body when you go from 60 mph in one direction to 40 miles an hour in the opposite direction instantly does bad things to the inside of your body (torn aortas,etc) -maybe there's a doctor out there who can weigh in on that; and 2)when the Smart car bounces off a larger vehicle the report said it will likely land in another lane where it can be hit by second vehicle. That's not the kind of bang for your buck that I'm looking for.

Dave, will putting regular in the smart affect the mileage? Will that void the warranty like the Miata? How much impact does putting regular have in terms of acceleration performance (meaning merging on highways)?

Red,
If you read our post on the Smart safety I think you'll find we raised many of those same concerns. I think you need an auto background to talk on auto safety unlike most of the mainstream media.
http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2008/05/iihs-on-the-sma.html

Bob W.
Not sure why you're arguing. If you read the top ten list of bang for the buck ALL the models were the most basic. I don't believe any had an automatic transmission. The Hybrids were broken out completely separately!

If folks want the most bang for the buck they're going to get the stripped models if they can. In this case I think it makes sense not to compare decently equipped versions of the cars like we did in a different post recently.

Again, shoppers do shop on price and now fuel economy. This is an interesting way to present the absolute lowest cost route.

A low cost route that very few people will choose becasue they can't find a stripped model, don't want a manual transmission and prefer things like CD players, MP3 jacks, air conditioning, power windows and cruise control.

Dave T., you're absolutely right. My humble apologies...

Hi,

If this were an article on "least expensive' cars and never mentioned hybrids, I would have been quite happy with the first table. It was the inclusion of hybrids in the same article that was the obvious apples-to-oranges comparison.

As a "least cost" article, it would have been much improved by including something about depreciation and the tradeoff between warranty expiration and vehicle value. This would have helped folks realize that there are 'knees in the curve' where a used car makes a lot of sense within that family of vehicles.

Let me give you a practical example. When our '91 Camry was lost in an accident, I had been on the waiting list for a new Prius from the local dealer. Back then, they were adding $3k to the MSRP price and getting it. But then I lost my commuting car and needed a replacement.

The next practical option, a Scion xB, combined the size and efficiency needed in a commuting car. Then I had an epiphany and realized Ebay provides a nation-wide, used car lot including hybrids. I soon found two, used 03 Prius and bought the one costing only $800 more than the Scion xB.

In engineering we conduct controlled studies where we fix some variables and vary one independent variable, the input, to determine the output variable. That discipline was missing from this report when the 'eye candy' that is standard in hybrids is not included in the econoboxes. Worse, there is no two seat hybrid to compare to the Smart.

Bob Wilson