flobert wrote:
> On 29 Jun 2006 18:18:45 -0700, zwsdotcom@gmail.com wrote:

> And are so much bigger.
> If you think a focus is a small car, you've got a bad case of "the
> texas grande's"

The Focus is described as a semicompact car. This size of vehicle is at
the price sweet spot in the United States.

> in europe, ford has cars smaller than the focus - the fiesta - which
> is a 4 seater, 3 or 5 door hatchback, not bad small cars. Then they
> have the Ka, smaller still, 3 door only, and you can't really get an

I'm aware of both of these vehicles, but we're talking about the Smart
here. It is going to be expensive and what are you going to get for
this money? A compact car will be a much better buy.

It will also probably be gasoline here, as US diesel fuel standards
preclude the use of domestic European-market diesel engines.

 

flobert wrote:
> On 29 Jun 2006 18:18:45 -0700, zwsdotcom@gmail.com wrote:

> And are so much bigger.
> If you think a focus is a small car, you've got a bad case of "the
> texas grande's"

The Focus is described as a semicompact car. This size of vehicle is at
the price sweet spot in the United States.

> in europe, ford has cars smaller than the focus - the fiesta - which
> is a 4 seater, 3 or 5 door hatchback, not bad small cars. Then they
> have the Ka, smaller still, 3 door only, and you can't really get an

I'm aware of both of these vehicles, but we're talking about the Smart
here. It is going to be expensive and what are you going to get for
this money? A compact car will be a much better buy.

It will also probably be gasoline here, as US diesel fuel standards
preclude the use of domestic European-market diesel engines.

 

flobert wrote:
> On 29 Jun 2006 18:18:45 -0700, zwsdotcom@gmail.com wrote:

> And are so much bigger.
> If you think a focus is a small car, you've got a bad case of "the
> texas grande's"

The Focus is described as a semicompact car. This size of vehicle is at
the price sweet spot in the United States.

> in europe, ford has cars smaller than the focus - the fiesta - which
> is a 4 seater, 3 or 5 door hatchback, not bad small cars. Then they
> have the Ka, smaller still, 3 door only, and you can't really get an

I'm aware of both of these vehicles, but we're talking about the Smart
here. It is going to be expensive and what are you going to get for
this money? A compact car will be a much better buy.

It will also probably be gasoline here, as US diesel fuel standards
preclude the use of domestic European-market diesel engines.

 

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:NpCdnVVPvotxFDjZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> That little two passenger death trap ought to sell well against all of the
> four passenger, $10,000 to $12,000, cars available in the US. LOL
>
>
> mike hunt
>

Just think of it as a stylish Gator or a motorcycle with training wheels,
then the driver and passenger can feel safe.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

 

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:NpCdnVVPvotxFDjZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> That little two passenger death trap ought to sell well against all of the
> four passenger, $10,000 to $12,000, cars available in the US. LOL
>
>
> mike hunt
>

Just think of it as a stylish Gator or a motorcycle with training wheels,
then the driver and passenger can feel safe.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

 

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:NpCdnVVPvotxFDjZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> That little two passenger death trap ought to sell well against all of the
> four passenger, $10,000 to $12,000, cars available in the US. LOL
>
>
> mike hunt
>

Just think of it as a stylish Gator or a motorcycle with training wheels,
then the driver and passenger can feel safe.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

 

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:NpCdnVVPvotxFDjZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> That little two passenger death trap ought to sell well against all of the
> four passenger, $10,000 to $12,000, cars available in the US. LOL
>
>
> mike hunt
>

Just think of it as a stylish Gator or a motorcycle with training wheels,
then the driver and passenger can feel safe.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

 

"flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
news:4kvaa29ctp7iur6152mbbhlu2jn1f70m94@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:28:00 +0000 (UTC), "TeGGeR®"
> <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>
>>"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in
>>news:cJZog.20153$Yk.14009@trnddc06:
>>
>>> DaimlerChrysler to Bring Teeny Two-Seater to U.S.
>>> The company's Smart car, available in Europe since 1998, is to go on
>>> sale here in early 2008.
>>> By John O'Dell
>>> Times Staff Writer
>>>
>>> June 29, 2006
>>>
>>> The tiny Smart car is only two-thirds the size of a Mini Cooper, but
>>> DaimlerChrysler has big plans for it.
>>
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>
>>Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah blah blah.
>>
>>Canada has these rolling telephone booths since...what? 2003?
>>
>>Daimler Chrysler loses money on each and every one, in spite of their high
>>purchase price.
>>
>>There are forty inches (I checked) between the front bumper and the top of
>>the steering wheel. You wanna bash into something while driving a "Smart"?
>>Go check how many inches separate *your* steering wheel top from *your*
>>front bumper.
>>
>>You know why "Smarts" are officially "safe"? Because there are too many
>>dollars between you and the other vehicles.
>
> Not true. Take a F1 car - head on crash at 140mph will only crush the
> first what, 8-10". Its all about structure and method. There was a
> video on google a few months back, showing a clip fromt he UK show
> "5th gear" - in it they crashed a smart from either 40 or 50mph into
> concrete blocks, in an offset impact. vehicle came out pretty damned
> good - better than a lot of vehicles I've seen in the US in slower
> impacts.

The problem with a limited crumple zone is that the vehicle has to be much
more rigid to minimize intrusion or deformation of the passenger
compartment. Designing a passenger compartment that does not deform at 40
mph is not as difficult as designing a passenger restraint system that does
not transmit all of the crash forces to the occupants, like a falling
elevator.

For example, you could put someone inside a padded safe, and push it out a
4th floor window and let it hit the ground. The safe may be structurally
sound, but the occupant is mushed inside.

--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

 

"flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
news:4kvaa29ctp7iur6152mbbhlu2jn1f70m94@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:28:00 +0000 (UTC), "TeGGeR®"
> <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>
>>"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in
>>news:cJZog.20153$Yk.14009@trnddc06:
>>
>>> DaimlerChrysler to Bring Teeny Two-Seater to U.S.
>>> The company's Smart car, available in Europe since 1998, is to go on
>>> sale here in early 2008.
>>> By John O'Dell
>>> Times Staff Writer
>>>
>>> June 29, 2006
>>>
>>> The tiny Smart car is only two-thirds the size of a Mini Cooper, but
>>> DaimlerChrysler has big plans for it.
>>
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>
>>Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah blah blah.
>>
>>Canada has these rolling telephone booths since...what? 2003?
>>
>>Daimler Chrysler loses money on each and every one, in spite of their high
>>purchase price.
>>
>>There are forty inches (I checked) between the front bumper and the top of
>>the steering wheel. You wanna bash into something while driving a "Smart"?
>>Go check how many inches separate *your* steering wheel top from *your*
>>front bumper.
>>
>>You know why "Smarts" are officially "safe"? Because there are too many
>>dollars between you and the other vehicles.
>
> Not true. Take a F1 car - head on crash at 140mph will only crush the
> first what, 8-10". Its all about structure and method. There was a
> video on google a few months back, showing a clip fromt he UK show
> "5th gear" - in it they crashed a smart from either 40 or 50mph into
> concrete blocks, in an offset impact. vehicle came out pretty damned
> good - better than a lot of vehicles I've seen in the US in slower
> impacts.

The problem with a limited crumple zone is that the vehicle has to be much
more rigid to minimize intrusion or deformation of the passenger
compartment. Designing a passenger compartment that does not deform at 40
mph is not as difficult as designing a passenger restraint system that does
not transmit all of the crash forces to the occupants, like a falling
elevator.

For example, you could put someone inside a padded safe, and push it out a
4th floor window and let it hit the ground. The safe may be structurally
sound, but the occupant is mushed inside.

--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

 

"flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
news:4kvaa29ctp7iur6152mbbhlu2jn1f70m94@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:28:00 +0000 (UTC), "TeGGeR®"
> <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>
>>"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in
>>news:cJZog.20153$Yk.14009@trnddc06:
>>
>>> DaimlerChrysler to Bring Teeny Two-Seater to U.S.
>>> The company's Smart car, available in Europe since 1998, is to go on
>>> sale here in early 2008.
>>> By John O'Dell
>>> Times Staff Writer
>>>
>>> June 29, 2006
>>>
>>> The tiny Smart car is only two-thirds the size of a Mini Cooper, but
>>> DaimlerChrysler has big plans for it.
>>
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>
>>Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah blah blah.
>>
>>Canada has these rolling telephone booths since...what? 2003?
>>
>>Daimler Chrysler loses money on each and every one, in spite of their high
>>purchase price.
>>
>>There are forty inches (I checked) between the front bumper and the top of
>>the steering wheel. You wanna bash into something while driving a "Smart"?
>>Go check how many inches separate *your* steering wheel top from *your*
>>front bumper.
>>
>>You know why "Smarts" are officially "safe"? Because there are too many
>>dollars between you and the other vehicles.
>
> Not true. Take a F1 car - head on crash at 140mph will only crush the
> first what, 8-10". Its all about structure and method. There was a
> video on google a few months back, showing a clip fromt he UK show
> "5th gear" - in it they crashed a smart from either 40 or 50mph into
> concrete blocks, in an offset impact. vehicle came out pretty damned
> good - better than a lot of vehicles I've seen in the US in slower
> impacts.

The problem with a limited crumple zone is that the vehicle has to be much
more rigid to minimize intrusion or deformation of the passenger
compartment. Designing a passenger compartment that does not deform at 40
mph is not as difficult as designing a passenger restraint system that does
not transmit all of the crash forces to the occupants, like a falling
elevator.

For example, you could put someone inside a padded safe, and push it out a
4th floor window and let it hit the ground. The safe may be structurally
sound, but the occupant is mushed inside.

--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

 

"flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
news:4kvaa29ctp7iur6152mbbhlu2jn1f70m94@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:28:00 +0000 (UTC), "TeGGeR®"
> <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>
>>"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in
>>news:cJZog.20153$Yk.14009@trnddc06:
>>
>>> DaimlerChrysler to Bring Teeny Two-Seater to U.S.
>>> The company's Smart car, available in Europe since 1998, is to go on
>>> sale here in early 2008.
>>> By John O'Dell
>>> Times Staff Writer
>>>
>>> June 29, 2006
>>>
>>> The tiny Smart car is only two-thirds the size of a Mini Cooper, but
>>> DaimlerChrysler has big plans for it.
>>
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>
>>Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah blah blah.
>>
>>Canada has these rolling telephone booths since...what? 2003?
>>
>>Daimler Chrysler loses money on each and every one, in spite of their high
>>purchase price.
>>
>>There are forty inches (I checked) between the front bumper and the top of
>>the steering wheel. You wanna bash into something while driving a "Smart"?
>>Go check how many inches separate *your* steering wheel top from *your*
>>front bumper.
>>
>>You know why "Smarts" are officially "safe"? Because there are too many
>>dollars between you and the other vehicles.
>
> Not true. Take a F1 car - head on crash at 140mph will only crush the
> first what, 8-10". Its all about structure and method. There was a
> video on google a few months back, showing a clip fromt he UK show
> "5th gear" - in it they crashed a smart from either 40 or 50mph into
> concrete blocks, in an offset impact. vehicle came out pretty damned
> good - better than a lot of vehicles I've seen in the US in slower
> impacts.

The problem with a limited crumple zone is that the vehicle has to be much
more rigid to minimize intrusion or deformation of the passenger
compartment. Designing a passenger compartment that does not deform at 40
mph is not as difficult as designing a passenger restraint system that does
not transmit all of the crash forces to the occupants, like a falling
elevator.

For example, you could put someone inside a padded safe, and push it out a
4th floor window and let it hit the ground. The safe may be structurally
sound, but the occupant is mushed inside.

--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

 

Ray O wrote:
> "flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
> news:4kvaa29ctp7iur6152mbbhlu2jn1f70m94@4ax.com...
>
>>On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:28:00 +0000 (UTC), "TeGGeR®"
>><tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in
>>>news:cJZog.20153$Yk.14009@trnddc06:
>>>
>>>
>>>>DaimlerChrysler to Bring Teeny Two-Seater to U.S.
>>>>The company's Smart car, available in Europe since 1998, is to go on
>>>>sale here in early 2008.
>>>>By John O'Dell
>>>>Times Staff Writer
>>>>
>>>>June 29, 2006
>>>>
>>>>The tiny Smart car is only two-thirds the size of a Mini Cooper, but
>>>>DaimlerChrysler has big plans for it.
>>>
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah blah blah.
>>>
>>>Canada has these rolling telephone booths since...what? 2003?
>>>
>>>Daimler Chrysler loses money on each and every one, in spite of their high
>>>purchase price.
>>>
>>>There are forty inches (I checked) between the front bumper and the top of
>>>the steering wheel. You wanna bash into something while driving a "Smart"?
>>>Go check how many inches separate *your* steering wheel top from *your*
>>>front bumper.
>>>
>>>You know why "Smarts" are officially "safe"? Because there are too many
>>>dollars between you and the other vehicles.
>>
>>Not true. Take a F1 car - head on crash at 140mph will only crush the
>>first what, 8-10". Its all about structure and method. There was a
>>video on google a few months back, showing a clip fromt he UK show
>>"5th gear" - in it they crashed a smart from either 40 or 50mph into
>>concrete blocks, in an offset impact. vehicle came out pretty damned
>>good - better than a lot of vehicles I've seen in the US in slower
>>impacts.
>
>
> The problem with a limited crumple zone is that the vehicle has to be much
> more rigid to minimize intrusion or deformation of the passenger
> compartment. Designing a passenger compartment that does not deform at 40
> mph is not as difficult as designing a passenger restraint system that does
> not transmit all of the crash forces to the occupants, like a falling
> elevator.
>
> For example, you could put someone inside a padded safe, and push it out a
> 4th floor window and let it hit the ground. The safe may be structurally
> sound, but the occupant is mushed inside.
>
true, but the way that f150 deformed, it didn't absorb much impact,
/and/ mushed the occupants by intrusion - the worst of both worlds.

personally, as a guy that like to surf junkyards from time to time, i've
taken the trouble to examine a fair number of wrecks. i'll take the
vehicle that doesn't allow intrusion any day thanks very much - i'll
take my chances on the effects of being punted around inside.

 

Ray O wrote:
> "flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
> news:4kvaa29ctp7iur6152mbbhlu2jn1f70m94@4ax.com...
>
>>On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:28:00 +0000 (UTC), "TeGGeR®"
>><tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in
>>>news:cJZog.20153$Yk.14009@trnddc06:
>>>
>>>
>>>>DaimlerChrysler to Bring Teeny Two-Seater to U.S.
>>>>The company's Smart car, available in Europe since 1998, is to go on
>>>>sale here in early 2008.
>>>>By John O'Dell
>>>>Times Staff Writer
>>>>
>>>>June 29, 2006
>>>>
>>>>The tiny Smart car is only two-thirds the size of a Mini Cooper, but
>>>>DaimlerChrysler has big plans for it.
>>>
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah blah blah.
>>>
>>>Canada has these rolling telephone booths since...what? 2003?
>>>
>>>Daimler Chrysler loses money on each and every one, in spite of their high
>>>purchase price.
>>>
>>>There are forty inches (I checked) between the front bumper and the top of
>>>the steering wheel. You wanna bash into something while driving a "Smart"?
>>>Go check how many inches separate *your* steering wheel top from *your*
>>>front bumper.
>>>
>>>You know why "Smarts" are officially "safe"? Because there are too many
>>>dollars between you and the other vehicles.
>>
>>Not true. Take a F1 car - head on crash at 140mph will only crush the
>>first what, 8-10". Its all about structure and method. There was a
>>video on google a few months back, showing a clip fromt he UK show
>>"5th gear" - in it they crashed a smart from either 40 or 50mph into
>>concrete blocks, in an offset impact. vehicle came out pretty damned
>>good - better than a lot of vehicles I've seen in the US in slower
>>impacts.
>
>
> The problem with a limited crumple zone is that the vehicle has to be much
> more rigid to minimize intrusion or deformation of the passenger
> compartment. Designing a passenger compartment that does not deform at 40
> mph is not as difficult as designing a passenger restraint system that does
> not transmit all of the crash forces to the occupants, like a falling
> elevator.
>
> For example, you could put someone inside a padded safe, and push it out a
> 4th floor window and let it hit the ground. The safe may be structurally
> sound, but the occupant is mushed inside.
>
true, but the way that f150 deformed, it didn't absorb much impact,
/and/ mushed the occupants by intrusion - the worst of both worlds.

personally, as a guy that like to surf junkyards from time to time, i've
taken the trouble to examine a fair number of wrecks. i'll take the
vehicle that doesn't allow intrusion any day thanks very much - i'll
take my chances on the effects of being punted around inside.

 

Ray O wrote:
> "flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
> news:4kvaa29ctp7iur6152mbbhlu2jn1f70m94@4ax.com...
>
>>On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:28:00 +0000 (UTC), "TeGGeR®"
>><tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in
>>>news:cJZog.20153$Yk.14009@trnddc06:
>>>
>>>
>>>>DaimlerChrysler to Bring Teeny Two-Seater to U.S.
>>>>The company's Smart car, available in Europe since 1998, is to go on
>>>>sale here in early 2008.
>>>>By John O'Dell
>>>>Times Staff Writer
>>>>
>>>>June 29, 2006
>>>>
>>>>The tiny Smart car is only two-thirds the size of a Mini Cooper, but
>>>>DaimlerChrysler has big plans for it.
>>>
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah blah blah.
>>>
>>>Canada has these rolling telephone booths since...what? 2003?
>>>
>>>Daimler Chrysler loses money on each and every one, in spite of their high
>>>purchase price.
>>>
>>>There are forty inches (I checked) between the front bumper and the top of
>>>the steering wheel. You wanna bash into something while driving a "Smart"?
>>>Go check how many inches separate *your* steering wheel top from *your*
>>>front bumper.
>>>
>>>You know why "Smarts" are officially "safe"? Because there are too many
>>>dollars between you and the other vehicles.
>>
>>Not true. Take a F1 car - head on crash at 140mph will only crush the
>>first what, 8-10". Its all about structure and method. There was a
>>video on google a few months back, showing a clip fromt he UK show
>>"5th gear" - in it they crashed a smart from either 40 or 50mph into
>>concrete blocks, in an offset impact. vehicle came out pretty damned
>>good - better than a lot of vehicles I've seen in the US in slower
>>impacts.
>
>
> The problem with a limited crumple zone is that the vehicle has to be much
> more rigid to minimize intrusion or deformation of the passenger
> compartment. Designing a passenger compartment that does not deform at 40
> mph is not as difficult as designing a passenger restraint system that does
> not transmit all of the crash forces to the occupants, like a falling
> elevator.
>
> For example, you could put someone inside a padded safe, and push it out a
> 4th floor window and let it hit the ground. The safe may be structurally
> sound, but the occupant is mushed inside.
>
true, but the way that f150 deformed, it didn't absorb much impact,
/and/ mushed the occupants by intrusion - the worst of both worlds.

personally, as a guy that like to surf junkyards from time to time, i've
taken the trouble to examine a fair number of wrecks. i'll take the
vehicle that doesn't allow intrusion any day thanks very much - i'll
take my chances on the effects of being punted around inside.

 

Ray O wrote:
> "flobert" <nomail@here.NOT> wrote in message
> news:4kvaa29ctp7iur6152mbbhlu2jn1f70m94@4ax.com...
>
>>On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 01:28:00 +0000 (UTC), "TeGGeR®"
>><tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in
>>>news:cJZog.20153$Yk.14009@trnddc06:
>>>
>>>
>>>>DaimlerChrysler to Bring Teeny Two-Seater to U.S.
>>>>The company's Smart car, available in Europe since 1998, is to go on
>>>>sale here in early 2008.
>>>>By John O'Dell
>>>>Times Staff Writer
>>>>
>>>>June 29, 2006
>>>>
>>>>The tiny Smart car is only two-thirds the size of a Mini Cooper, but
>>>>DaimlerChrysler has big plans for it.
>>>
>>>
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yeah, yeah, yeah. Blah blah blah.
>>>
>>>Canada has these rolling telephone booths since...what? 2003?
>>>
>>>Daimler Chrysler loses money on each and every one, in spite of their high
>>>purchase price.
>>>
>>>There are forty inches (I checked) between the front bumper and the top of
>>>the steering wheel. You wanna bash into something while driving a "Smart"?
>>>Go check how many inches separate *your* steering wheel top from *your*
>>>front bumper.
>>>
>>>You know why "Smarts" are officially "safe"? Because there are too many
>>>dollars between you and the other vehicles.
>>
>>Not true. Take a F1 car - head on crash at 140mph will only crush the
>>first what, 8-10". Its all about structure and method. There was a
>>video on google a few months back, showing a clip fromt he UK show
>>"5th gear" - in it they crashed a smart from either 40 or 50mph into
>>concrete blocks, in an offset impact. vehicle came out pretty damned
>>good - better than a lot of vehicles I've seen in the US in slower
>>impacts.
>
>
> The problem with a limited crumple zone is that the vehicle has to be much
> more rigid to minimize intrusion or deformation of the passenger
> compartment. Designing a passenger compartment that does not deform at 40
> mph is not as difficult as designing a passenger restraint system that does
> not transmit all of the crash forces to the occupants, like a falling
> elevator.
>
> For example, you could put someone inside a padded safe, and push it out a
> 4th floor window and let it hit the ground. The safe may be structurally
> sound, but the occupant is mushed inside.
>
true, but the way that f150 deformed, it didn't absorb much impact,
/and/ mushed the occupants by intrusion - the worst of both worlds.

personally, as a guy that like to surf junkyards from time to time, i've
taken the trouble to examine a fair number of wrecks. i'll take the
vehicle that doesn't allow intrusion any day thanks very much - i'll
take my chances on the effects of being punted around inside.