Since this forum seems so dead right now, I thought I'd blow a lungful into the corpse.

In the May issue of Motor Trend, there is a report on smart in North America along with some impressionistic drawings of the new ForFour model. The latter will be introduced at the IAA in Frankfurt in September 2003. There are some good spy videos of this Mitsubishi-based model on the Web these days.

The M-T article states that smart will be in N.A. in 2005 with four models: the original, the roadster (YES!), the ForFour and a 4WD version of the ForFour.

Who knows if they're right. After all, the Brain Trust at Motor Trend elected the 1978 T-Bird with its opera windows and Landau Roof Car of the Year (and the Chev Vega, 8 years before that)...

 

The forfour Smart pics were released yesterday. @ Http://media.smart.com and at
http://www.jes-mercedes.de./indexie.htm


This does share a platform with the new (last fall) Mitsubishi Colt
http://www.mitsubishi-motors.co.jp/COLT/index.html

The USA will be getting a version of this to be manufactured in Brazil. Not sure whether 'both' styles will be sold (at both Mitsu & Smart stores) or just one? or a new skinned version for the USA.

It was thought that they might try to pump them through Dodge dealers similar to what DC is doing in Mexico with the Dodge Atos (made by Hyundai), but the lastest word is that 'smart' dealers will be set up, although quite possibly using existing Chrysler or Dodge outlets.

As for AWD, I do believe that Mitsu is providing the AWD bits.

 

Mike, you'd be interested in the May issue of the British magazine CAR, which has a column by Michael Stahl on the Smart roadster and a letter and photo elsewhere. This is the only generally negative review I've seen, and we should remember that most of the staffers on this mag are addicted to cars that go very quickly from point to point, like the WRC STI and the Evo VII/VIII. Some quotes:

"The performance is more Corolla than Carrera, and the handling distinctive without being dangerous". The context fopr this quote makes it clear that the handling is too competent to induce adrenaline-rush.

"By most measures the Smart is a triumph of design...because it wrings maximum effect from minimum complexity....A complete car (takes) only 4.5 hours to build. But there's not a lot of depth in the unwrapping. It all feels like buying a big boofy box of computer game and having a solitary CD roll limply out onto the table when you get home. Intellectually, one can accept that this might still represent value for the money, but there's little to delight the fingertips."

Both the letter-writer and Stahl make the point that the Smart is entertaining, but that in most markets it will be out-priced by competition that offers fun and considerably more performance for the same outlay.

 

The 4WD in the Smarts is/will be a downgraded (slightly de-featured) version of the 4Matic system in the W164 ML, the GST, the next-gen A-Class, and the possible G-Class/ML-G.

 

I think they're missing the point.

The definitive version of the roadster is - I think - not the Brabus or even the 60 kW version. These are SLOW cars, and even the Brabus will be left for dead by cars costing less than half as much...

Rather I think the definitive smart roadster is the 45 kW version, with fibreglass hardtop. In that form, it is what the smart media spin doctors claim it to be - a minimalist, affordable roadster in the Austin-Healey Sprite league.

Here's how I look at it. If I want a smart (other than the Mitsubishi chimera ForFour), I accept that I will have funky design, two seats, a small amount of luggage space and modest performance in exchange for excellent potential fuel economy. I also would like a car with a removable top. Accepting that this is the attraction of the formula to me (it is), then I face a choice:

1) A smart cabrio. I like these, a lot. The main problem with this choice is that the car - despite the improvements to the ride and handling in the G2 cars - is dynamically flawed, and I am a keen driver. Plus it's limited to 135 km/h, which these days is a bit mean. I know why they limit it - so it won't get the driver into too much trouble.

2) A smart 45 kW roadster. The price of this car is maybe 3-4% more than a passion cabrio. It has two seats, it has limited luggage room, it has modest performance, it has excellent fuel economy. It also has a removable roof. Because of its design conception, the car must be a superb handler, with the chassis capabilities being far in excess of the engine's abilities. The opposite is true in the normal smart. The roadster does not need a speed limiter due to this, and as a result, the car will top out at 160 km/h.

For me the choice is clear. The 45 kW roadster's an economy car with some panache and handling ability. Even the 60 kW version is essentially just that. To pretend that its combination of features is present in any other car is wrong. Anyone who knows anything about smart will know that less money can buy far more performance elsewhere. People who are into big speed should not even think of getting a smart roadster.

So I think the reviewer you quoted above is falling into that trap, of looking at price point only and not considering the type of person, who understands what a smart roadster is, and will be attracted to it. And on this basis, the least expensive and least powerful version is the epitome of the formula.

If I wanted a car that would also be a drop-top, but be quick and get 8 L/100 km instead of 5 L/100 km, sure, there is lots of choice out there...

 

The Smart roadster is a 82 hp car!
Top speed is 180 km/h limited, and in EVO magazine the top sports car magazine they gave to the car 4 stars! the maximum is 5!
Greetings

 

And the rear

 

82???..did you forget an extra digit or something?


it looks alright