http://www.wxpnews.com/rd/rd.cfm?id=...FA-Smart_Crash

Check this out. These little SMART cars seem pretty goldarned safe to me !!!

This was beat to death over on TheCarLounge.net, but the results are highly misleading. Tons of cars now have very rigid passenger compartments, the Smart being one of them. As such, the prime cause of injury and death is not cockpit intrusion, it's occupant restraint and mitigation of impact forces.

You'll notice there were no crash dummies in the vehicle tested. If there had been, there's a fair chance they may have broken the belts or still been slammed into the dash from intense stretching of the belts. You can see how badly the belts stretch on the IIHS 40mph offset tests. There also doesn't appear to be good survivability in the footwell area, but again, without a dummy in there, it's hard to know exactly what happened.

The BIGGEST factor however is the lack of adequate crumple zones. Those crumple zones are there to slow the impact of the crash. If you have a maximum of 3 feet of usable crumple zone (about right for a massive collision in a mid-size sedan) then you're not really doing X miles per hour to zero in an instant, you're doing it in the time it takes to cover decellerate over a span of several feet. The Smart has virtually no crumple space. How much structural crumple does it appear to have? I'm not talking how far the flimsy plastic bumper sticks out from the frame, either. It looks like it has maybe 6 inches of usable, structural crumple before you hit that rigid passenger compartment.

Because of this, the g-forces will likely be about 5 times higher when you get in a wreck in the Smart versus a midsize sedan. Even compact sedans like the Civic and Prius should have a good 1.5-2 feet of crumple space at a minimum. That can mean the difference between g-forces that your body can cope with versus having a basal skull fracture where your head rips off the spinal cord, or having your internal organs rip away from their original location and you die of internal bleeding.

Don't get me wrong, I think the Smart is a great car for low speed, high density city use. I'd feel pretty safe driving one in a city where myself and the traffic around me rarely got above 30-35mph. It's no surprise they're incredibly popular cars around London, for example. I would not feel safe driving one in suburban USA however. Give me a new Civic instead.

"Don't try this at home!"

61.5mpg lifetime - 82mpg in recent months

Best Run >
www.cleanmpg.com

"fanatic" is what the lazy call the dedicated

I think what SMART is doing is to just convince people that a car that small CAN be safe. It's a MAJOR big part of whether or not they will sell very many of these cars - do people believe they are safe or not?

Hi AZCivic:

___Excellent analysis. I just watched the video myself and not only would you have to deal with horrific G’s due to the loss of a real crumple zone, there appeared to be extensive foot intrusion on the drivers side. It also appeared that the driver headrest was actually out of the car during the impact almost until the time it came to rest. You have to watch the video again to see that??? I believe without Side Curtains, you would have died from a broken neck just as Dale Earnhardt died during a NASCAR race a few years ago. I am not saying any other automobile could have protected you any better as an almost head-on / deflective - crash at 70 miles per hour in anything is about the limits you would survive no matter how great the vehicle was designed. I am just glad I was not in that Smart in that crash. Then again, I do not know if the Accord or even a Ford 500/Volvo S80 for that matter would have allowed one to survive at that speed into that barrier?

___Good Luck

___Wayne R. Gerdes

If this car is to be sold in the USA, either NHTSA or IIHS will eventually test this car, and we'll know more....

I'd favor selling the Smart in the US. I am concerned about the non-existant crumple zones (yes, that's out-of-character coming from me).

If they sell motorcycles in the US, it's only fair they sell the Smart. It still has to be safer than a motorcycle.

61.5mpg lifetime - 82mpg in recent months

Best Run >
www.cleanmpg.com

"fanatic" is what the lazy call the dedicated

Hi Delta_Flyer:

___I hope they sell a ton here. If they would place an extremely fuel efficient ICE in it (they haven’t except for the Canadian’s getting the Diesel), even I would consider one and I drive amongst a sea of big rigs and large SUV’s daily.

___Good Luck

___Wayne R. Gerdes

Another "Smart" thought - this car would be a likely choice for anyone expermenting with EVs, alternative fuel vehicles....

61.5mpg lifetime - 82mpg in recent months

Best Run >
www.cleanmpg.com

"fanatic" is what the lazy call the dedicated

I first saw one of these smart cars back in 2001 when I took a tour of Italy. Since, I have been back to europe a hand full of times and they seem to be more popular as there are lots of them on the roads. I would think they would be popular over here as well.