Smart Car Review

[Common Sense Al]

If you want to argue that point let's bet a million dollars.....you go crash your 2000 lb Yugo into a tree at 35 mph.....I'll crash my 6000 lb Expedition into the same size tree and see who survives better.........

Be sure to get it on tape so we can put it on YouTube.

The high schoolers will love the physics lesson.

But the skiing1974 did say "if something big hits you". I don't think you're much safer in an Expedition than a Yugo if you get hit by a Boeing 737... so in that case it makes sense.

[matj6876]

Cool..........now we are debating the laws of physics here....I've seen it all now.

Last time I was in school Newton's law of motion was F=MA.

Without getting into a lengthly debate it is common sense to me to realize that a larger vehicle will dissipate the energy of a crash better than a smaller vehicle, with all other factors being equal (air bags, vehicle construction)

If you want to argue that point let's bet a million dollars.....you go crash your 2000 lb Yugo into a tree at 35 mph.....I'll crash my 6000 lb Expedition into the same size tree and see who survives better.........

Just to play devils advocate here... all things being equal .... we are assuming the tree represents an immovable object and therefore the decelearation (A or dv) in the good man's second law above is the same for both the Yugo and the Expedition?

It would mean that the Force (F) would be 3 times greater for the 6000 lb Expedition than the 2000 lb Yugo. This would necessitate the larger car be more able to dissipate the energy of the crash than the smaller in order to be as safe.

Don't get me wrong... I'll take the Expedition over the Yugo in the car vs tree confrontation anyday.... but I think that because of it's weitght the Expedition has to dissipate energy better and not vice versa.

Then again I may have that all wrong... it's late!

[Common Sense Al]

It would mean that the Force (F) would be 3 times greater for the 6000 lb Expedition than the 2000 lb Yugo. This would necessitate the larger car be more able to dissipate the energy of the crash than the smaller in order to be as safe.

Yes, I think that is true. The expedition will need to absorb about three times the force without transferring (or transferring the least amount possible) the energy to your body. Since the Explorer is bigger, I think it should be designed with crumple zones to absorb as much energy as possible, and can absorb more energy than the 2000 lb car... but the 2000 lb car only needs to absorb 1/3 the energy.... so while it is smaller, it doesn't need to absorb as much energy. So design (good crumple zones) would be very important for both vehicles, to absorb the most energy a possible in the car frame without transferring it to your body.

I think things will change a bit if you use an object other than an immovable one.

[Lantana07]

Wow, we really do need a Propeller Head section on the forum

[jlbates]

you go crash your 2000 lb Yugo into a tree at 35 mph.....I'll crash my 6000 lb Expedition into the same size tree and see who survives better.........

Trees, I've somehow managed to avoid them in my 20+ years of driving. Other cars, on the other hand - I manage to get hit by other drivers on an annual basis here in the Metroplex. It's your 6000 pound truck that has me worried.

[linux_is_cool]

I guess if they would turn the front end of the smart car into a cockpit, kind of like they do with the Enzo, so it separates from the reset of the car during a strong impact, then you may be ok

[BrianC]

They just look too stupid at this point. Why, in their infinite wisdom, do car makers design these efficient cars to look like children's play toys?

Agreed! They do look like a dumb toy.

Remember that rom-com "Just Married" w/ Ashton Kutcher? The Smart Car was featured as the butt of many jokes & visual gags...

[Common Sense Al]

This one doesn't look so dumb... looks like it also has some interesting info on the EV1:

http://www.chevrolet.com/electriccar/

The Concept Chevy Volt, with its revolutionary E-Flex Propulsion System will be different than any previous electric vehicle because it will use a lithium-ion battery with a variety of range-extending onboard power sources, including gas and, in some vehicles, E85
ethanol(1) to recharge the battery while driving.

When it comes to plugging in, the Volt will be designed to use a common 110–volt household plug. For someone who drives less than 40 miles a day, Chevy Volt will use zero gasoline and produce zero emissions.(2) For longer trips, Chevy Volt's range-extending power source kicks in to recharge the lithium-ion battery pack as required. We expect a driving range of an estimated 640 miles.(3)

[linux_is_cool]

I would agree, the Volt is pretty sleek and sophisticated looking

[skiing1974]

funny! F=ma, everyone focuses on m, what about a? a will be much larger for Expedition than Yugo, so there

[BrianC]

This one doesn't look so dumb... looks like it also has some interesting info on the EV1:

http://www.chevrolet.com/electriccar/

The Concept Chevy Volt, with its revolutionary E-Flex Propulsion System will be different than any previous electric vehicle because it will use a lithium-ion battery with a variety of range-extending onboard power sources, including gas and, in some vehicles, E85
ethanol(1) to recharge the battery while driving.

When it comes to plugging in, the Volt will be designed to use a common 110–volt household plug. For someone who drives less than 40 miles a day, Chevy Volt will use zero gasoline and produce zero emissions.(2) For longer trips, Chevy Volt's range-extending power source kicks in to recharge the lithium-ion battery pack as required. We expect a driving range of an estimated 640 miles.(3)

The Volt does look very cool. Chevrolet is aiming to start selling the Volt in November 2010.

Although we haven't said exactly when the Chevy Volt will come to market, we've set our internal targets to complete the vehicle by the end of 2010. The specific date depends on the results of rigorous battery testing that's going on right now.

The target price was < $30,000, but it just increased to $35,000.

See www.gm-volt.com

[matj6876]

funny! F=ma, everyone focuses on m, what about a? a will be much larger for Expedition than Yugo, so there

Disagree - "a" is delta v, or change in velocity (deceleration). When either car hits the "immovable" object it goes from 35MPH to 0MPH almost intantntly so "a" in the same in both cases (really quite high).

[neighbor]

I guess if they would turn the front end of the smart car into a cockpit, kind of like they do with the Enzo, so it separates from the reset of the car during a strong impact, then you may be ok

I remember that wreck. Estimated speed was close to 170, if I remember correctly. The Enzo literally cut off utility poles. There were parts strewn for over 1/2 mile.

The occupants walked away. Amazing what you get for $700k+.

[linux_is_cool]

I guess if they would turn the front end of the smart car into a cockpit, kind of like they do with the Enzo, so it separates from the reset of the car during a strong impact, then you may be ok

I remember that wreck. Estimated speed was close to 170, if I remember correctly. The Enzo literally cut off utility poles. There were parts strewn for over 1/2 mile.

The occupants walked away. Amazing what you get for $700k+.

I agree, what a marketing campaign to use, Hey buy this car and you can wreck it a 170+mph and walk away unscathed

[skiing1974]

45 miles per gallon
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Other-Ma ... enameZWDVW