From benzaholic  Thu Oct 25 12:11:24 2007
From: Alec C

Well, the smart road show came through Austin this week, and being a
99 dollar "reservation holder", I got to attend the early show
yesterday.

They had three passion coupes and one convertible. All had the
automated manual transmission, and only the convertible had power
steering.

The initial engine for the US is a 1.0 liter, 3 cylinder, 71hp gasser
that I've heard is a Mitsubishi unit. The Brabus turbo gasser may come
here in a year or two if smart has any success in the US, and still no
word on a nice turbodiesel. I think they are still struggling to meet
California/Massachusetts/etc. emissions for the diesel.

The car is around 1700 pounds. Just under that for the hardtop and
just over for the convertible. The demo models we had were Euro
models, including kph speedos and km odometers, but otherwise fairly
close to what will start being delivered in the US in early January
for around $15K.

Plenty of interior space for two people. I'm 5' 10" and fairly stout,
and I'm frequently at a lack for headroom in most cars, and there were
no space issues for me.

Acceleration was actually not unacceptable. It's no speed demon, but
it moves what little weight it has reasonably well. Probably better
than an 85 300SD, and likely still in the race with an 86 or 87
300SDL, which are my likely choices for next car if I don't go for the
smart.

Braking was fine. The front wheels are stuffed full of brake rotor.
The rears have the scrawniest looking drums I think I've ever seen,
but they probably don't need to do anything more than serve as parking
brakes. Remember that this thing is 3 feet shorter than a Mini Cooper,
so even with rear engine and rear wheel drive, nearly all of the
braking can only be done with the fronts, no matter what kind of
brakes are in back.

Steering wasn't great. Not much action for a given amount of turning
the steering wheel, and low speed maneuvers get surprisingly heavy
without the electric power steering. Consider two hands a requirement
for parallel parking, unless you use the marketing trick of facing the
curb in a parallel parking spot, and relying on the fact that this car
is no longer than most other cars are wide.

The transmission is my biggest problem, although the reps were saying
the tranny computer is being slightly reprogrammed for the US.

It's an automated manual, meaning it's a regular manual with clutch,
but gear changes are entirely handled by the computer (other than the
shift paddles on the steering wheel). When starting from a stop, you
can clearly feel the robot using the clutch to start you off. That's
fine, but subsequent shifts are horrendously slow for my taste, and
they seem to take the same amount of time whether you're just putting
along or are at full throttle. I didn't time it, but it felt like
shifts took well over a full second. It really destroyed my experience
with the paddle shifters, and even when running in normal full-auto
mode, it's very disconcerting.

My current frame of reference is my 89 300CE, whose transmission
probably shifts a little more quickly than when it was new. Some of my
car's shifts border on harsh, but I never feel like it's wasting any
time or energy.

The smart reps mentioned that the US reprogramming will produce
quicker shifts, but they gave no indication of how much quicker. They
will also add a "creep" mode to make it behave more like a traditional
auto when starting to move. The ones I drove dropped to neutral when
you stopped, and stayed there when you took your foot off the brake.
You had to give it some gas to engage first. Creep mode will start
engaging first when you release the brakes. This aspect didn't bother
me. It was the subsequent shifts that would keep me from dropping down
money if they are not substantially improved. I'm starting to
appreciate Audi's latest commercials where they say their twin clutch
unit can shift in two tenths of a second.

There are also still no official US EPA fuel economy estimates. EPA is
currently testing them. smart currently simply claims, "the vehicle is
designed to achieve 40 plus mpg under normal driving conditions and
current standards", with no clear indication if that is highway or
combined. The reps at the tour said they have been driving the cars
between tour cities, using the trucks and trailers only for the
cutaway frame and their show equipment, and we got "high 30's/low
40's" from one of the reps, with implications that it was mostly high
30's. I was hoping for more than that.

The driving at the show was very limited: no highway speeds and no
real uneven surfaces; just a couple of stretches of less than a
quarter mile, several stops, and a little coned chicane, but they
really discouraged attacking the chicane.

When I left the facility, I was frustrated by the fact that my 89
300CE with 228K miles (that really wants a few thousand bucks or more
fed to it for more suspension rubber, climate control blower, various
plastic pieces, a dying driver's seat frame, and a paint job to cover
the disappearing clear coat) drives, rides, steers, and feels worlds
better. I'm gonna get myself stuck with a W126 300SD or SDL that's
older than my current coupe and still needs suspension rubber and
climate control work. I keep trying to avoid it, but I'm not having
much success.

Happy Benzing,
Alec C
Taylor, Texas
89 300CE, 228K