Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

O.T. bub-bye ugly tesla truck...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Yes, definitely a dense car. You could likely almost set it inside the bed of my "little" pickup, but it weighs about half as much as the whole truck. Yowza.

    No kidding about that "it is not made for fuel economy".
    1601

    Keep eye on ball.
    Hashim Khan

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by tomato coupe View Post

      The data isn't that hard to find. The lightest car sold in the U.S. for the past few years has been the Mitsubishi Mirage, weighing in at 2,018 lbs. The last gas-burning Smart Car sold in the U.S. was the 2016 (3rd generation), which weighed 1,984 lbs. The vast majority (89%) of Smart Cars sold in the U.S., however, were the 1,653-1,753 lb. 2nd generation models.
      The mirage is a good example of size/weight comparison --- basically the same weight yet the car is another 50% longer,,, you have to admit it's kinda shocking to look at a smart car and know what it weighs,,, the first gen CRX's were also a good 50% longer and only weighed 1,676lbs !!! they also slaughtered the smart cars MPG rating in both the city and highway...

      it's just a realization that they could be doing so much better, and some of that's engine design --- heck the new honda CRV's are dense little piggies too, 3,500lbs !!! that's allot of weight, yet their little 1500cc direct injection gas turbo gets them an incredible 28 city 34mpg highway rating almost twice the weight of the smart car with all kinds of more drag and in some cases it's only falling short 4 mpg ---- again --- somethings wrong, that's what were talking about... the little smart cars are pigs, unless you get the diesel then things start matching up allot better... but again ---- if there was more emphasis on weight and drag coefficient they could be doing better both city AND highway with either engine, like it or not they do have highway ratings on them on fuel economy.gov
      and like it or not I do see them on the highway... at least where i live...

      Comment


      • #78
        They are indeed built like a brick.
        I was always amazed at the car's survivability (if not the occupants) after watching 5th Gears's crash of one into a concrete barrier at 70 mph.
        Like Jay Leno used to say about the '58 Buick Roadmaster, just hose off the dash and sell it to the next guy.

        Home, down in the valley behind the Red Angus
        Bad Decisions Make Good Stories​

        Location: British Columbia

        Comment


        • #79
          They were enthusing over the way the cage worked (and admitting that the occupants were dead anyway).

          But looking at the car, even if the occupants were not killed by the deceleration, I very much suspect that the driver, at least, would have no legs left.... There was a lot of stuff that looks to have intruded into that area. Possibly that was just appearance, but looking at the outside, the heavy stuff that used to be in front had to go somewhere, that wheel etc, appears to be in the drivers foot/leg space.

          Likely the Smart car is not particularly survivable. Plus, running into those concrete blocks may not be equivalent to a head on collision. In that, the opposing vehicle has energy also, and acts more like a bridge abutment, not moving at all aside from whatever crumple zone it has. The movement of the blocks did actually take some of the energy and reduced the deceleration forces, by an amount that is not easily compared accurately to a car, or dump truck (two different scnarios).

          In the end it does not matter much. Hit a bridge, or a dump truck, and any car is going to have an issue. The Smart car is just worse, and in any collision, may do more damage to you than vehicles with much more crumple zone, because the g forces are likely to be larger due to that cage.
          1601

          Keep eye on ball.
          Hashim Khan

          Comment


          • #80
            It's a brutal test for any vehicle --- they did give the car a slight "way out" by angling the barrier but that did also make it encroach on the Drivers side more,,, in full agreement with the legs - I don't think there would be anything left...

            there's a little method to the smart cars madness should it tangle with a vehicle the same weight but larger --- it's such a dense strong little bastard it will just use the other cars crumple zone as part of it's own, will penetrate further in and perhaps into the occupants, both vehicles occupants will still experience the same internal G-forces,

            If it tangles with a much larger of both size and weight it's damage might not look all that bad because it's so strong, but it will have to stop and then get sent back at great speed in milliseconds --- the internal G-forces for the smart car people will be off the charts... only so much you can do.

            Comment


            • #81
              It's not fun being the ant among elephants......
              1601

              Keep eye on ball.
              Hashim Khan

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by A.K. Boomer View Post
                The mirage is a good example of size/weight comparison --- basically the same weight yet the car is another 50% longer,,, you have to admit it's kinda shocking to look at a smart car and know what it weighs,,,
                You throw around a lot of inaccurate numbers. Here's the reality:

                Weight:
                93% of the (non-electric) Smart cars in the U.S. are 2nd generation models, which have a weight ranging from 1,653-1,753 lbs. The weight of the 6th generation Mitsubishi Mirage (2012 - present) ranges from 1,995 to 2,072 lbs.
                ==> the vast majority of Smart cars driven the U.S. weigh 16% less than the Mirage.

                Length:
                The Smart car has a length of 106". The Mitsubishi Mirage hatchback has a length of 146".
                ==> The Smart car is 27% shorter in length than the Mirage.

                So, that's a far cry from " the Mirage is 50% longer but weighs the same." The relative weights are actually very reasonable, considering the main contributor to the length difference is the inclusion/exclusion of the rear seating area.




                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by tomato coupe View Post

                  You throw around a lot of inaccurate numbers. Here's the reality:

                  Weight:
                  93% of the (non-electric) Smart cars in the U.S. are 2nd generation models, which have a weight ranging from 1,653-1,753 lbs. The weight of the 6th generation Mitsubishi Mirage (2012 - present) ranges from 1,995 to 2,072 lbs.
                  ==> the vast majority of Smart cars driven the U.S. weigh 16% less than the Mirage.

                  Length:
                  The Smart car has a length of 106". The Mitsubishi Mirage hatchback has a length of 146".
                  ==> The Smart car is 27% shorter in length than the Mirage.

                  So, that's a far cry from " the Mirage is 50% longer but weighs the same." The relative weights are actually very reasonable, considering the main contributor to the length difference is the inclusion/exclusion of the rear seating area.



                  You have your own "brand" of misguided-ness,,,

                  the first gen CRX is 145" long --- the first gen smart car is 98" long if you tack on half (50%) or 49" onto 98 you come up with 147" so sue me - im 2" off lol

                  not to mention the width factor,,, but go ahead --- while everyone else pretty much agree's they are heavy for their "appearance" just keep convincing yourself they look what they should weigh and all other cars are lighter than what they look to be, another words - it's the whole worlds fault for making the smart car be stupidly heavy lol


                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by A.K. Boomer View Post

                    You have your own "brand" of misguided-ness,,,

                    the first gen CRX is 145" long --- the first gen smart car is 98" long if you tack on half (50%) or 49" onto 98 you come up with 147" so sue me - im 2" off lol
                    C'mon dude, you can't even remember what you wrote?

                    Originally posted by A.K. Boomer
                    The mirage is a good example of size/weight comparison --- basically the same weight yet the car is another 50% longer

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by tomato coupe View Post
                      C'mon dude, you can't even remember what you wrote?

                      Ehh - not worried about that - the CRX has it covered - deal with it...

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by A.K. Boomer View Post

                        Ehh - not worried about that - the CRX has it covered - deal with it...
                        So, now you want to compare a car that was never sold in the U.S. to a car that has been out of production for 33 years, and claim that has some relevance?

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by tomato coupe View Post

                          So, now you want to compare a car that was never sold in the U.S. to a car that has been out of production for 33 years, and claim that has some relevance?
                          Sure - I don't care in they built the damn thing on mars and only sold it on the moon - it's heavy for it's size - it's a statement - and in general a correct one, again deal with it,,,

                          is this somehow personal for you? please if your overweight or something I did not know and am not wanting you to take it that way... peace... maybe your Mom owns one? again im sorry and not meaning to offend you by it... you ok? we good?

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by J Tiers View Post
                            But looking at the car, even if the occupants were not killed by the deceleration, I very much suspect that the driver, at least, would have no legs left...
                            No chance of survivability there. I have cut dead people out of cars with far less intrusion and much longer deceleration times. The best possible case is that they would have lived (sort of) a couple of minutes until they bled out the giant squashed holes where the legs used to be. The structure might have kept upper half of the body from getting too gooey, so the family might be able to have an open casket funeral...
                            Location: North Central Texas

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              A tow truck driver once told me that if you're in a wreck in a Smart car, they just dig a hole with a backhoe and drop the car and you in it. He was probably exaggerating some. Anyway, I don't see what is smart about paying full price for half a car.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                The "Smart" car is like a KIA = Killed In Accident...

                                It should be limited to a true city car, with top speed of 40 MPH. That might be survivable.
                                http://pauleschoen.com/pix/PM08_P76_P54.png
                                Paul , P S Technology, Inc. and MrTibbs
                                USA Maryland 21030

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X