Maybe Not Such a Smart Idea After All

Year after year, relentlessly sometimes, it seems like the trend mongers are looking for the small car that will capture the American imagination and ween us from our SUVs, minvans, and muscle cars. The Prius has lived up to the hype, but it's more the exception than the rule. Most great small hopes crash and burn (just metaphorically, we hope).

The latest next-small-thing is the Smart FourTwo, from a division of Daimler-Benz. Already out in Europe for a few years, the small two-seat bubble on wheels weighs just 1800 pounds, with a small 3-cylinder engine hanging off the rear axle. It's so small that two can fit in the typical city street parallel parking space. Given its diminutive proportions it promised great gas mileage. Seems like just what a country paying $4+ for gas is waiting for, right?

Maybe not. The FourTwo is actually on the streets now and reviews from non-PR people are coming in. The several I've read have ranged from luke-warm praise to fairly savage criticism. Take, for example, Car and Driver's take:

Its short wheelbase (73.5 inches) results in a nerve-jangling ride on neighborhood streets that are raggedy, a place where, oddly, it is supposed to shine as the perfect errand boy. And there’s no overcoming the minuscule cargo space, although if you cram stuff up to the headliner, the room swells to 12 cubic feet, and the passenger seatback folds down flat. Our test vehicle got a disappointing 32 mpg overall, not the 50 or 60 mpg it looks like it should deliver, and the tiny engine requires pricey 91-octane fuel.

Still, the Fortwo has real charm and can be fun to drive if you like to drive. If you don’t and are simply looking for some relief from three-dollar gas prices, think Chevy Aveo, Honda Fit, and Toyota Yaris. They’re as potato-faced as Jimmy Kimmel, but they do have back seats and trunk space, and the prices are in the same ballpark.

0-60 shows up in 14+ seconds. Don't even ask about a quarter-mile.

Those lackluster MPG figures are a theme of other reviews. But that's not the only deficiency. Behold this review from Sunday's New York Times:

The Smart Fortwo could do for Midtown gridlock what Mr. Bloomberg’s successful bans on smoking and trans fats did for New Yorkers’ health: after a few miles in this anemic two-seat tomato can, drivers will sprint to the subway and abandon the surface streets for good.

* * *

But unlike the mostly fabulous Mini, the Smart Fortwo, with room for just two urban warriors and a few loincloths of cargo, turns out to be a Trojan pony, primitive in its performance and no more fuel-efficient than some far more practical cars.

* * *

If the engine is mediocre, the five-speed automated manual transmission is an engineering embarrassment. You could practically squeeze a half-inning of baseball into the maddening delay between the release of one gear and the engagement of the next. The Smart loses momentum in the pause, lurching passengers forward, and then Barcalounges backward when it oozes into a higher gear.

The Smart has been described as fun to drive by some reviewers, but other than showing taillights to the neighborhood riding mowers, I don’t see it. The Smart steers decently but feels clumsy when pushed hard. Tire grip is meager, the body wallows, and big city bumps come crashing through the suspension.

Ouch. Another Times review from Sunday (from a writer who tested it in LA) is almost as scathing.

To be fair, our FourTwo is not the same one they get in Europe, which is powered by a turbo diesel motor that produces much better mileage. And, if they're not just trying to justify spending the money, several satisfied Smart owners in this thread claim that the mileage increases once the engine gets broken in.

Still, given that you can buy a real car with excellent mileage, better performance, and more room for the same money - why wouldn't you? It's the smart thing to do.