SMART? Probably Not.
Allow me to share a passage from the last Wired magazine I will be buying in a long, long time:
Smart Fortwo Though this king of microcars has been scooting around the EU practically since before it was the EU, the Fortwo is finally making its way stateside. It's about time! Americans like to save gas too; now we don't have to shell out Prius bucks or duck into the gray market. The Smart's 36 mph is worthy of a hybrid but will set you back far less (it starts at $11,590). Better late than never. (Emphasis mine.)
Let's examine this passage, shall we? That bit about the "gray market" I fully understand. I posted about ZAP's involvement earlier. Whatever ZAP touches, I don't. 'Nuff said. From the same sentence, though: "Prius bucks?" Let's see: they're trying to equate a $20K four-door, four passenger sedan with a gasser just a bit bigger than a golf cart that costs almost ten grand less? Four seats vs. two, more than double the carrying capacity, and the larger gets better mileage. Uh, utility-wise, I would say the Prius represents a far greater value.
Oh, and let's finally note the elephant in the phrase, shall we? Not only does the Prius give more space for the money, it gets better mileage. Like 15 or more mpg better. Hell, my '86 Honda Civic has four seats and almost gets better mileage. What gives?
Well, no one is saying what gives, and that really pisses me off. I have some speculation to offer, though, conjecture that focuses on the importance of companies to brand themselves.
Years ago, a friend's neighbor had a sailboat in his yard for sale. During a lull in the party, I spoke with the neighbor about the boat, a 15-foot day sailer. He noted the manufacturer: Bayliner. That wasn't a surprise to me. Bayliner makes all kinds of fiberglass boats, right? Ah, there's the interesting bit. He informed me that Bayliner, with their image currently wrapped up in power boats, all but denies its sailboat-making past.
Anyone with an understanding of the animosity and sometime hostility simmering between blow boaters and stink pot operators understands how this perception can affect sales. Though the skills and tools for making all fiberglass boats apply to both sail and power, one would be hard-pressed explaining that to the target audience for the entry-level boat class. Folks who frequent Bayliner outlets, sadly, don't display the savvy required to avoid these outlets, and often that lack of savvy will result in a tow to shore (according to the Coast Guard, Bayliners are the number one vessel brand towed).
Let's apply that to car brands. In Germany, Mercedes Benz is a car maker. Not a luxury car maker, not a high-end car maker; just a car maker. That said, the fact that they developed a high-mileage vehicle for the European Union, where gas prices are far higher than they are in the US, makes perfect sense.
I should mention that the European gasoline-powered Fortwo gets 51 mpg city and about 66 mpg highway. Not 36. Definitely not 36.
To understand the high mileage of these machines, it might be helpful to understand the nature of internal combustion engines. A friend at work spent most of his youth building engines, attaching them to wheel bases and going really, really fast. I personally have never driven over 200 mph. He has. Back in high school, his project car was an old Satellite with an over 400 ci engine. He played with various configurations, including dual 4-barrel carburators, electronically controlled fuel injection, and fuel injection with supercharging. He got more power from his engine with each successive upgrade, finally getting enough ponies under the hood to smoke the wheels at 70 when he engaged the supercharger.
With these configurations, he got:
14 mpg;
12 mpg; and
8 mpg.
Here's what many might find surprising. That list should read:
carburated -- 8 mpg;
fuel injection w/out supercharger -- 12 mpg; and
fuel injection with supercharger -- 14 mpg.
That's right, folks. The same car powered by the same engine block got better mileage as the power available increased.
Max and his Interceptor, chased by Lord Wez
Why? Superchargers did indeed increase fuel consumption, back when they were paired with carburators. Carbs basically restrict the flow of air, allowing a bit of gas to dribble into the airflow as the mix heads for the cylinders. Increase the airflow, you increase the consumption. Increase the airflow by attaching a humongous blower that crams air past the carb jets? Now you're sucking gas in a major way. Which was why Mel had to kill the supercharger when his low fuel alarm buzzed in The Road Warrior.
Fuel injection adds fuel by shooting it directly into the cylinder just before combustion. Supercharging the fuel injected engine increases the oxygen content of the cylinder, giving the injected gas more to burn. Same amount of fuel, more bang.
The European Smart Fortwo uses a small, fuel-injected and turbocharged engine. (Turbochargers increase air flow just like superchargers, but get their power from the exhaust airflow instead of from belts attached to the crank.)
The Canadian Fortwo was available only in non-turbocharged diesel. These engines cannot be licensed in the United States, due to the US's more stringent regulations against particulate emissions from diesels. This would easily explain the poor Consumer Reports ratings the Smart got. Those particular engines, from what I have been able to gather, suck.
Now we get to the crux of the biscuit. Why will the US Smarts suck? Well, the official word is pretty quiet, so I had to do some back-door snooping. First of all, the US Smart will be slight larger, a few inches longer and wider (I forget the exact dimensions). That doesn't worry me at all. During my European Smart test drive, I decided to hammer it in a corner, only to discover the available power can overwhelm the high center of gravity. I didn't flip it, don't worry, but a less-attentive driver easily could. Even a few inches of width would help improve the turning stability. Since we in the States are not generally faced with driving on tiny streets dating back to the era of hand carts, this represents no real hardship.
Also, interestingly, the car will not be built by Mercedes, but by Mitsubishi. Those that have driven both versions report the Mitsubishi version lacks the power that inspired my blast of a test drive. Not surprising, that, since it is not turbocharged. That's right, folks, the US Smart cut corners on the one design element that made the car a worthwhile purchase, the turbocharged engine that enabled the fuel economy.
Brilliant.
Actually, that might just be brilliant. Not for the consumer, but for Mercedes US. I should add a few data points to the discussion. First of all, unlike the Smart in Canada, the US Smart will not be sold in Mercedes dealers, but rather through dedicated Smart dealers being established right now. That list will not include The Green Car Company, the local folks that carry the gray market European Smarts. According to the unofficial scuttlebutt, they wanted the franchise but were turned down flat. Isn't that interesting?
Furthermore, let's say for the sake of illustrative argument, you already owned one of the Mercedes Fortwos, one with the actual Mercedes triparted circle decals. Let's say some punk stole yours, ripping it off the hood. Let's say you called Mercedes for a replacement.
You would be turned down, told that the decals cannot be obtained at any price.
Herein lies the brilliance. I believe the Smarts represent only the latest victim of hyper-branding on the part of the United States Mercedes dealers. They have moved mountains to associate the German car as the ultimate luxury car, targeting the pretentiously rich, those folks who have (in the eyes of the branding gurus) the absolute least motivation to save on fuel. Rich folks, after all, don't need to worry about economy. That's a concern for the poor. Thus the presence of not just an economy car but a hyper-economy car built by the same automaker gives these branding wankers conniption fits. Really, can you imagine some unwashed Birkenstocked hippie-wannabes with their hemp mu-mus and pony tails in filthy bandanas shopping for cars in the same building?!? It beggars the imagination. Oh, the horror!
Furthermore, imagine a shop already familiar with the European Fortwo selling the bastardized, underpowered and generally sucky US version. Such a shop could literally offer side-by-side test drives, using the Mitsubishi version as a loss leader. These shops would also have handy pre-existing relationships with parts suppliers in Europe for custom jobs. In a nutshell, such a shop would expose the Mitsubishi bastard for the sham that it is. This would reflect directly on Mercedes, raising uncomfortable questions about the discrepencies between the two versions, questions Mercedes US would rather keep very, very quiet.
Yes, folks, the United States is being denied high-mileage cars just so local dealers don't have to compare their current stock of gas-guzzling auto offerings to anything resembling an economy car.
Me being me, my brain planned an end-around. Okay, the Mitsubishi body will cost a lot less. I inquire about the price of the European engine and transmission. What would it take to drop the better powerplant and gearbox into the cheaper, more stable body? The answer (if it proves feasible) was about $10K less than the gray market ZAPped version.
And then it hit me: . . .slight larger, a few inches longer and wider. . . The driveline and axles for the European powerplant will not fit the US chassis. Making the connections between all the parts will require custom machining and adapter plates, adding perhaps thousands to the final price -- and of course nullifying any new-car warranty.
Shit. I'm willing to bet this is the real reason the body changed at all. This sticks the US economy buyers will utter pieces of shiny crap to drive, earning them derision on the roads as they try to drive their 1800 pound tiny turd-sicles with a 700 horsepower engine.
And behind the deception we have a magazine that would rather appease potential advertisers than devote a reporter to what could be a very revealing exposé on the pressures exerted by the auto dealership system. I've written on this before, but this has got to be the most egregious abuse of the current system across which I have come so far. Wired dropped the ball as a media outlet by spewing the lies without question, even going so far as to put a positive spin on the shitball they pitched.
I was writing a very nasty note to Wired expressing my opinion. After I started it, though, I realized they haven't published any of my other nasties, and definitely won't commit this one to print. Why? The only letters from readers they print concern matters outside of their business model. No printed letter calls bullshit on their blatant product pushing and refusal to confront advertisers on their questionable claims.
Coincidentally and conveniently, the offending blurb spewed from the last issue my subscription had to offer. I'll just let the 10+ year subscription lapse with this lasting insult to the readers' intelligence. Good riddance to them.
Smart Fortwo Though this king of microcars has been scooting around the EU practically since before it was the EU, the Fortwo is finally making its way stateside. It's about time! Americans like to save gas too; now we don't have to shell out Prius bucks or duck into the gray market. The Smart's 36 mph is worthy of a hybrid but will set you back far less (it starts at $11,590). Better late than never. (Emphasis mine.)
Let's examine this passage, shall we? That bit about the "gray market" I fully understand. I posted about ZAP's involvement earlier. Whatever ZAP touches, I don't. 'Nuff said. From the same sentence, though: "Prius bucks?" Let's see: they're trying to equate a $20K four-door, four passenger sedan with a gasser just a bit bigger than a golf cart that costs almost ten grand less? Four seats vs. two, more than double the carrying capacity, and the larger gets better mileage. Uh, utility-wise, I would say the Prius represents a far greater value.
Oh, and let's finally note the elephant in the phrase, shall we? Not only does the Prius give more space for the money, it gets better mileage. Like 15 or more mpg better. Hell, my '86 Honda Civic has four seats and almost gets better mileage. What gives?
Well, no one is saying what gives, and that really pisses me off. I have some speculation to offer, though, conjecture that focuses on the importance of companies to brand themselves.
Years ago, a friend's neighbor had a sailboat in his yard for sale. During a lull in the party, I spoke with the neighbor about the boat, a 15-foot day sailer. He noted the manufacturer: Bayliner. That wasn't a surprise to me. Bayliner makes all kinds of fiberglass boats, right? Ah, there's the interesting bit. He informed me that Bayliner, with their image currently wrapped up in power boats, all but denies its sailboat-making past.
Anyone with an understanding of the animosity and sometime hostility simmering between blow boaters and stink pot operators understands how this perception can affect sales. Though the skills and tools for making all fiberglass boats apply to both sail and power, one would be hard-pressed explaining that to the target audience for the entry-level boat class. Folks who frequent Bayliner outlets, sadly, don't display the savvy required to avoid these outlets, and often that lack of savvy will result in a tow to shore (according to the Coast Guard, Bayliners are the number one vessel brand towed).
Let's apply that to car brands. In Germany, Mercedes Benz is a car maker. Not a luxury car maker, not a high-end car maker; just a car maker. That said, the fact that they developed a high-mileage vehicle for the European Union, where gas prices are far higher than they are in the US, makes perfect sense.
I should mention that the European gasoline-powered Fortwo gets 51 mpg city and about 66 mpg highway. Not 36. Definitely not 36.
To understand the high mileage of these machines, it might be helpful to understand the nature of internal combustion engines. A friend at work spent most of his youth building engines, attaching them to wheel bases and going really, really fast. I personally have never driven over 200 mph. He has. Back in high school, his project car was an old Satellite with an over 400 ci engine. He played with various configurations, including dual 4-barrel carburators, electronically controlled fuel injection, and fuel injection with supercharging. He got more power from his engine with each successive upgrade, finally getting enough ponies under the hood to smoke the wheels at 70 when he engaged the supercharger.
With these configurations, he got:
Here's what many might find surprising. That list should read:
That's right, folks. The same car powered by the same engine block got better mileage as the power available increased.
Max and his Interceptor, chased by Lord Wez
Why? Superchargers did indeed increase fuel consumption, back when they were paired with carburators. Carbs basically restrict the flow of air, allowing a bit of gas to dribble into the airflow as the mix heads for the cylinders. Increase the airflow, you increase the consumption. Increase the airflow by attaching a humongous blower that crams air past the carb jets? Now you're sucking gas in a major way. Which was why Mel had to kill the supercharger when his low fuel alarm buzzed in The Road Warrior.
Fuel injection adds fuel by shooting it directly into the cylinder just before combustion. Supercharging the fuel injected engine increases the oxygen content of the cylinder, giving the injected gas more to burn. Same amount of fuel, more bang.
The European Smart Fortwo uses a small, fuel-injected and turbocharged engine. (Turbochargers increase air flow just like superchargers, but get their power from the exhaust airflow instead of from belts attached to the crank.)
The Canadian Fortwo was available only in non-turbocharged diesel. These engines cannot be licensed in the United States, due to the US's more stringent regulations against particulate emissions from diesels. This would easily explain the poor Consumer Reports ratings the Smart got. Those particular engines, from what I have been able to gather, suck.
Now we get to the crux of the biscuit. Why will the US Smarts suck? Well, the official word is pretty quiet, so I had to do some back-door snooping. First of all, the US Smart will be slight larger, a few inches longer and wider (I forget the exact dimensions). That doesn't worry me at all. During my European Smart test drive, I decided to hammer it in a corner, only to discover the available power can overwhelm the high center of gravity. I didn't flip it, don't worry, but a less-attentive driver easily could. Even a few inches of width would help improve the turning stability. Since we in the States are not generally faced with driving on tiny streets dating back to the era of hand carts, this represents no real hardship.
Also, interestingly, the car will not be built by Mercedes, but by Mitsubishi. Those that have driven both versions report the Mitsubishi version lacks the power that inspired my blast of a test drive. Not surprising, that, since it is not turbocharged. That's right, folks, the US Smart cut corners on the one design element that made the car a worthwhile purchase, the turbocharged engine that enabled the fuel economy.
Brilliant.
Actually, that might just be brilliant. Not for the consumer, but for Mercedes US. I should add a few data points to the discussion. First of all, unlike the Smart in Canada, the US Smart will not be sold in Mercedes dealers, but rather through dedicated Smart dealers being established right now. That list will not include The Green Car Company, the local folks that carry the gray market European Smarts. According to the unofficial scuttlebutt, they wanted the franchise but were turned down flat. Isn't that interesting?
Furthermore, let's say for the sake of illustrative argument, you already owned one of the Mercedes Fortwos, one with the actual Mercedes triparted circle decals. Let's say some punk stole yours, ripping it off the hood. Let's say you called Mercedes for a replacement.
You would be turned down, told that the decals cannot be obtained at any price.
Herein lies the brilliance. I believe the Smarts represent only the latest victim of hyper-branding on the part of the United States Mercedes dealers. They have moved mountains to associate the German car as the ultimate luxury car, targeting the pretentiously rich, those folks who have (in the eyes of the branding gurus) the absolute least motivation to save on fuel. Rich folks, after all, don't need to worry about economy. That's a concern for the poor. Thus the presence of not just an economy car but a hyper-economy car built by the same automaker gives these branding wankers conniption fits. Really, can you imagine some unwashed Birkenstocked hippie-wannabes with their hemp mu-mus and pony tails in filthy bandanas shopping for cars in the same building?!? It beggars the imagination. Oh, the horror!
Furthermore, imagine a shop already familiar with the European Fortwo selling the bastardized, underpowered and generally sucky US version. Such a shop could literally offer side-by-side test drives, using the Mitsubishi version as a loss leader. These shops would also have handy pre-existing relationships with parts suppliers in Europe for custom jobs. In a nutshell, such a shop would expose the Mitsubishi bastard for the sham that it is. This would reflect directly on Mercedes, raising uncomfortable questions about the discrepencies between the two versions, questions Mercedes US would rather keep very, very quiet.
Yes, folks, the United States is being denied high-mileage cars just so local dealers don't have to compare their current stock of gas-guzzling auto offerings to anything resembling an economy car.
Me being me, my brain planned an end-around. Okay, the Mitsubishi body will cost a lot less. I inquire about the price of the European engine and transmission. What would it take to drop the better powerplant and gearbox into the cheaper, more stable body? The answer (if it proves feasible) was about $10K less than the gray market ZAPped version.
And then it hit me: . . .slight larger, a few inches longer and wider. . . The driveline and axles for the European powerplant will not fit the US chassis. Making the connections between all the parts will require custom machining and adapter plates, adding perhaps thousands to the final price -- and of course nullifying any new-car warranty.
Shit. I'm willing to bet this is the real reason the body changed at all. This sticks the US economy buyers will utter pieces of shiny crap to drive, earning them derision on the roads as they try to drive their 1800 pound tiny turd-sicles with a 700 horsepower engine.
And behind the deception we have a magazine that would rather appease potential advertisers than devote a reporter to what could be a very revealing exposé on the pressures exerted by the auto dealership system. I've written on this before, but this has got to be the most egregious abuse of the current system across which I have come so far. Wired dropped the ball as a media outlet by spewing the lies without question, even going so far as to put a positive spin on the shitball they pitched.
I was writing a very nasty note to Wired expressing my opinion. After I started it, though, I realized they haven't published any of my other nasties, and definitely won't commit this one to print. Why? The only letters from readers they print concern matters outside of their business model. No printed letter calls bullshit on their blatant product pushing and refusal to confront advertisers on their questionable claims.
Coincidentally and conveniently, the offending blurb spewed from the last issue my subscription had to offer. I'll just let the 10+ year subscription lapse with this lasting insult to the readers' intelligence. Good riddance to them.