In article >,
Krypsis > wrote:

> On 24/06/2010 2:26 PM, Omelet wrote:
> > In >,
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 21:36:22 -0500, >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'd rather be bruised than crushed. ;-)
> >>
> >> I'd rather avoid both.
> >
> > No argument there...
>
>
> How about twisted in knots!!????
>
> Here's a more realistic crash test involving a Smart!
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZs1QuHerTU&NR=1
>
>
> Krypsis

Oy.

Right now I drive a small pickup truck and get 23mpg. Chevy S-10 like
I've posted before... and it's got 150k miles on it. To date, I've
managed to avoid a car crash for the past 23 years. <KNOCKING ON WOOD!>
even with a daily commute of 30 to 45 minutes by freeway.

I hope to continue that!
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
*Only Irish *coffee provides in a single glass all four *essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar *and fat. --Alex Levine

On 24/06/2010 8:20 PM, Omelet wrote:
> In .au>,
> > wrote:
>
>> On 24/06/2010 2:26 PM, Omelet wrote:
>>> In >,
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 21:36:22 -0500, >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'd rather be bruised than crushed. ;-)
>>>>
>>>> I'd rather avoid both.
>>>
>>> No argument there...
>>
>>
>> How about twisted in knots!!????
>>
>> Here's a more realistic crash test involving a Smart!
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZs1QuHerTU&NR=1
>>
>>
>> Krypsis
>
> Oy.
>
> Right now I drive a small pickup truck and get 23mpg. Chevy S-10 like
> I've posted before... and it's got 150k miles on it. To date, I've
> managed to avoid a car crash for the past 23 years.<KNOCKING ON WOOD!>
> even with a daily commute of 30 to 45 minutes by freeway.
>
> I hope to continue that!

Here's a more complete version of the vid you first posted. Take careful
note of the summation at the end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s

The car we recently traded in for our new Corolla, also a Corolla, had
not a single dent nor scratch in any body panel. Just a few very minor
scrapes on the front and rear bumpers where OTHER DRIVERS were less
judicious in parking their vehicles close to ours.

That said, one of the things I learnt early on in my driving experience
was that the best way to avoid an accident is to assume that every other
driver is an idiot and take appropriate precautions. Always assume they
might do something totally wacky because, invariably, they do! Since
this car is, or was, my wife's daily drive, one can assume that she
operates in a like manner.

Avoiding accidents is the name of the game. Here's to another 23 years
of accident avoidance for you!

Krypsis

ps Stick with reasonable sized vehicles and you're more likely to walk
away from one and claim on the insurance!

Krypsis wrote on Thu, 24 Jun 2010 23:35:25 +1000:

> On 24/06/2010 8:20 PM, Omelet wrote:
>> In .au>,
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 24/06/2010 2:26 PM, Omelet wrote:
>>>> In >,
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 21:36:22 -0500, >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd rather be bruised than crushed. ;-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd rather avoid both.
>>>>
>>>> No argument there...
>>>
>>> How about twisted in knots!!????
>>>
>>> Here's a more realistic crash test involving a Smart!
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZs1QuHerTU&NR=1
>>>
>>> Krypsis
>>
>> Oy.
>>
>> Right now I drive a small pickup truck and get 23mpg. Chevy S-10
>> like I've posted before... and it's got 150k miles on
>> it. To date, I've managed to avoid a car crash for the past 23
>> years.<KNOCKING ON WOOD!> even with a daily commute of 30 to 45
>> minutes by freeway.
>>
>> I hope to continue that!

> Here's a more complete version of the vid you first posted.
> Take careful note of the summation at the end.

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju6t-yyoU8s

> The car we recently traded in for our new Corolla, also a
> Corolla, had not a single dent nor scratch in any body panel. Just a
> few very minor scrapes on the front and rear bumpers
> where OTHER DRIVERS were less judicious in parking their
> vehicles close to ours.

> That said, one of the things I learnt early on in my driving
> experience was that the best way to avoid an accident is to
> assume that every other driver is an idiot and take
> appropriate precautions. Always assume they might do something
> totally wacky because, invariably, they do! Since this car is,
> or was, my wife's daily drive, one can assume that she operates in a
> like manner.


I would just add that you might make the same assumption about yourself.
I've had a few minor scrapes too that were my fault.


--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Omelet wrote:
>
> Smart cars get over 30 mpg too which is a big selling point.
> Fluffed up SUV's and trucks don't.

My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
Focus.

There are a lot of options in the small and economy ranges that do
better than the Smart when it comes to mileage and they have larger
crumple zones. That makes the Smart other than smart if either of those
aspects are among your goals.

I want a smaller than average car because I don't want to be the cause
of crushing someone, but I don't want a car so small I end up getting
crushed.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:26:51 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> wrote:

> My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
> extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
> farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
> Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
> average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
> Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
> Focus.

As a city dweller, sure a Smart car appeals to me for *city* mileage
(you poopoo 5 extra miles on the highway - but I don't). Mainly I
like it because it can squeeze into parking spaces that no other car
I've owned since I sold the Fiat Spider can fit into.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On 6/23/2010 6:13 PM, Krypsis wrote:
> On 24/06/2010 1:23 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>> On 6/23/2010 4:36 PM, Omelet wrote:
>>> In article<_cadnUqZ2NmZdrzRnZ2dnUVZ_vCdnZ2d@earthlink .com>,
>>> David > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:12:33 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Omelet
>>>> > wrote,
>>>>> In >,
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes. The car posted previously was destroyed and the Smart Car
>>>>>> bounced around like a ball in both the videos I watched. I would
>>>>>> *not* want to be inside one whether or not the "cage" survived.
>>>>>
>>>>> With a seat belt and an air bag, I'd rather be inside of one of those
>>>>> than a car that crushed me to death. :-(
>>>>
>>>> But being bounced around like that would really smart.
>>>
>>> Hence the seatbelt and sidways air bags.
>>> They are supposed to prevent you from being bounced around.
>>>
>>> I'd rather be bruised than crushed. ;-)
>>
>> It's a very impressive video. I would have a hard time believing that
>> stopping in less than 4 or so feet from 70 MPH would be survivable for
>> most people. My guess is that you're talking 60, 70, 80, 90 or so Gs of
>> deceleration. The good part is that your body would be quite presentable
>> although your eyeballs wouldn't be in their normal location - unless you
>> like to keep them on your dashboard.
>>
>> Those cars would be pretty good over here in Hawaii since 50 MPH is
>> pretty fast for us. :-)
>
> 50mph + the 50mph of the other often much larger vehicle and you have a
> closing speed of 100mph. If the other vehicle is an SUV weighing 2 or 3
> times more than the Smart, the momentum of that SUV will accelerate the
> Smart to a rearward direction effectively increasing the relative speed
> of the Smart.
>
> Surviving a sudden stop from just 60mph is problematical for most
> people. You see, the problems arise from the momentum of "parts" of your
> body. Your torso, because it is strapped in, stops suddenly. Your head
> moves on and your neck snaps. I have seen cases where people have not a
> single mark on them but the neck is broken and they are quite dead!
> You will also note that the crash didn't include real people...
> significant fact that! I have seen other Smart crash tests where even
> the airbag failed to prevent the dummies head from contacting the
> steering wheel or dash. Was that force enough to snap a real persons
> neck? I wonder!
>
> Significant also is the fact that the Smart spun around violently. These
> twisting forces are quite sufficient to snap your spine.
>
> People survive high speed crashes now because of the cars progressive
> crumple zone. That is an area of the car forward of the firewall that
> progressively crumples absorbing the initial impact forces. To be
> successful, the vehicle needs to have significant body length forward of
> the firewall. With the Smart, your FEET are almost at the very front of
> the vehicle. Effectively, your feet are IN the crumple zone. Look at the
> front left corner of the Smart in the 70mph crash test! The driver might
> be ok in this instance but the passenger would have significant issues.
> You may survive but, as like as not, you will be forever condemned to
> riding around in a small vehicle, a wheelchair.
>
> Krypsis
>

A lot depends of what you hit with your car. My guess is that hitting a
solid object like a tree or a big concrete thingie is likely to fatal at
half the speed shown in the video. All things being equal, it's better
to another car than a tree.

On 6/24/2010 8:29 AM, sf wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:26:51 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> > wrote:
>
>> My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
>> extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
>> farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
>> Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
>> average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
>> Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
>> Focus.
>
> As a city dweller, sure a Smart car appeals to me for *city* mileage
> (you poopoo 5 extra miles on the highway - but I don't). Mainly I
> like it because it can squeeze into parking spaces that no other car
> I've owned since I sold the Fiat Spider can fit into.
>

I had a BMC 1100 that would make your Fiat seem a little on the long side.

The Fiat 124 was one of my favorite cars. No doubt, MGB owners would
feel kinda dumb when they would see the Spider owners putting up their
top with one hand at a stop light. Their British design convertible tops
really needed 2 guys standing outside the car to put up or take down
properly.

Double overhead cams, 4 wheel disk brakes, nice handling AND a
comfortable ride, nifty European horn - what's not to like? Well, maybe
rust, broken timing belts, self-destructing interior. Nobody's perfect. :-)

With a toddler in the family, the convertible was not an option, I
instead had 3 BC sport coupes. Great cars!

On 6/24/2010 12:26 PM, Doug Freyburger wrote:
> Omelet wrote:
>>
>> Smart cars get over 30 mpg too which is a big selling point.
>> Fluffed up SUV's and trucks don't.
>
> My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
> extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
> farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
> Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
> average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
> Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
> Focus.
>

But they do better than that. Two friends have them. One gets in the
high 40s low 50s and the other who is more of a hot rod gets in the low 40s.

> There are a lot of options in the small and economy ranges that do
> better than the Smart when it comes to mileage and they have larger
> crumple zones. That makes the Smart other than smart if either of those
> aspects are among your goals.
>
> I want a smaller than average car because I don't want to be the cause
> of crushing someone, but I don't want a car so small I end up getting
> crushed.

Thats the whole idea of the cage construction. You can watch the
numerous crash tests showing how well it works.

In article >,
Doug Freyburger > wrote:

> Omelet wrote:
> >
> > Smart cars get over 30 mpg too which is a big selling point.
> > Fluffed up SUV's and trucks don't.
>
> My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
> extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
> farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
> Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
> average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
> Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
> Focus.
>
> There are a lot of options in the small and economy ranges that do
> better than the Smart when it comes to mileage and they have larger
> crumple zones. That makes the Smart other than smart if either of those
> aspects are among your goals.

Maybe it's time for some facts?

http://www.smartusa.com/smart-fortwo...del=pure_coupe

starting at $11,990* (US$)

Fuel consumption

33 city/41 highway (2010 EPA estimated)

http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/focussedan/

US$16,290

24 city/35 highway

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On 6/24/2010 6:03 PM, Dan Abel wrote:

>
> Maybe it's time for some facts?
>
> http://www.smartusa.com/smart-fortwo...del=pure_coupe
>
> starting at $11,990* (US$)
>
> Fuel consumption
>
> 33 city/41 highway (2010 EPA estimated)
>
> http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/focussedan/
>
> US$16,290
>
> 24 city/35 highway
>

A friend of mine has one of these and insisted that I take it for a
drive. It was surprisingly comfortable for two people... even a big guy
like me. While it won't rocket you off the line, it has more than
enough power for driving around town... and is VERY maneuverable...
easiest vehicle to park I have ever driven.

But.... it kind of feels like you are driving a glorified golf cart.
You feel every bump in the road and every gust of wind. My friend says
that driving on the highway at 65 mph and being passed by a semi is an
adventure.

If I had a need for just an "around town" car to run errands, I would
consider it.

If I wanted a car that was good around town and on the highway, I would
go for a Prius. I rented one for 4 days and was very impressed.

FWIW... my Ford Taurus gets 27 miles a gallon and is economical enough
for around town and comfortable enough for long road trips.

George L

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:03:47 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:

> Maybe it's time for some facts?
>
> http://www.smartusa.com/smart-fortwo...del=pure_coupe
>
> starting at $11,990* (US$)
>
I didn't realize they were so inexpensive.

> Fuel consumption
>
> 33 city/41 highway (2010 EPA estimated)

Nice!

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

Dan Abel wrote:
> Doug Freyburger wrote:
>> Omelet wrote:
>> >
>> > Smart cars get over 30 mpg too which is a big selling point.
>> > Fluffed up SUV's and trucks don't.
>>
>> My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
>> extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
>> farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
>> Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
>> average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
>> Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
>> Focus.
>>
>> There are a lot of options in the small and economy ranges that do
>> better than the Smart when it comes to mileage and they have larger
>> crumple zones. That makes the Smart other than smart if either of those
>> aspects are among your goals.
>
>Maybe it's time for some facts?
>
>http://www.smartusa.com/smart-fortwo...del=pure_coupe
>
>starting at $11,990* (US$)
>
>Fuel consumption
>
>33 city/41 highway (2010 EPA estimated)
>
>http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/focussedan/
>
>US$16,290
>
>24 city/35 highway

When do I laugh... those death traps are toys r us kiddy cars... I
wouldn't ride in one if you gave it to me for free.

This gets me there safely/comfy @ 24/mpg highway:
http://i49.tinypic.com/24l08wk.jpg

http://www.toyota.com/fjcruiser/

In article > ,
Krypsis > wrote:

> I'll post an addendum to my earlier post as this YouTube video pretty
> much demonstrates my viewpoint on the Smart in a crash.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmUBgTHppv8&NR=1
>
> Don't get me wrong here. I quite like the Smart myself. I'd even buy one
> IF all the other cars I'm likely to encounter are of a similar size. The
> reality is that there isn't much on the road that's even close to the
> miniscule size of the Smart.
>
> My wife's daily drive is a current model Toyota Corolla. It has a kerb
> weight of 1330 Kg (2925 lbs) compared with the kerb weight of the Smart
> at 730 Kg (1600 lbs). That means that, in an impact with a Smart, my
> wife's car will transfer a sizeable portion of it's kinetic energy to
> the Smart. This will result in the Smart being bounced backwards quite
> violently. If the impact is a half frontal, the transfer of kinetic
> energy will impart a spin to the Smart's backward bounce. This can be
> quite clearly seen in the Youtube video.
>
> Krypsis

I liked his statement "you can't repeal the laws of physics". <g>
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
*Only Irish *coffee provides in a single glass all four *essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar *and fat. --Alex Levine

In article >,
Doug Freyburger > wrote:

> There are a lot of options in the small and economy ranges that do
> better than the Smart when it comes to mileage and they have larger
> crumple zones. That makes the Smart other than smart if either of those
> aspects are among your goals.
>
> I want a smaller than average car because I don't want to be the cause
> of crushing someone, but I don't want a car so small I end up getting
> crushed.

It can be a balancing act... but my original point about the smart cars
is that they way the structure is built, you won't get crushed.

But you do get bounced rather badly.

The surrounding air bags are supposed to help prevent injury from that
from what I understand about them?
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:26:51 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> > wrote:
>
> > My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
> > extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
> > farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
> > Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
> > average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
> > Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
> > Focus.
>
> As a city dweller, sure a Smart car appeals to me for *city* mileage
> (you poopoo 5 extra miles on the highway - but I don't). Mainly I
> like it because it can squeeze into parking spaces that no other car
> I've owned since I sold the Fiat Spider can fit into.

Then there are also donorcycles... <g>
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:03:47 -0700, Dan Abel > wrote:
>
> > Maybe it's time for some facts?
> >
> > http://www.smartusa.com/smart-fortwo...del=pure_coupe
> >
> > starting at $11,990* (US$)
> >
> I didn't realize they were so inexpensive.
>
> > Fuel consumption
> >
> > 33 city/41 highway (2010 EPA estimated)
>
> Nice!

I was surprised too when I asked owners about the price. :-)
Double savings benefit.
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

On 25/06/2010 10:55 AM, brooklyn1 wrote:
> Dan Abel wrote:
>> Doug Freyburger wrote:
>>> Omelet wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Smart cars get over 30 mpg too which is a big selling point.
>>>> Fluffed up SUV's and trucks don't.
>>>
>>> My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
>>> extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
>>> farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
>>> Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
>>> average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
>>> Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
>>> Focus.
>>>
>>> There are a lot of options in the small and economy ranges that do
>>> better than the Smart when it comes to mileage and they have larger
>>> crumple zones. That makes the Smart other than smart if either of those
>>> aspects are among your goals.
>>
>> Maybe it's time for some facts?
>>
>> http://www.smartusa.com/smart-fortwo...del=pure_coupe
>>
>> starting at $11,990* (US$)
>>
>> Fuel consumption
>>
>> 33 city/41 highway (2010 EPA estimated)
>>
>> http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/focussedan/
>>
>> US$16,290
>>
>> 24 city/35 highway
>
> When do I laugh... those death traps are toys r us kiddy cars... I
> wouldn't ride in one if you gave it to me for free.
>
> This gets me there safely/comfy @ 24/mpg highway:
> http://i49.tinypic.com/24l08wk.jpg
>
> http://www.toyota.com/fjcruiser/
>
It's a bit ugly, isn't it?

Bet you would like to have one in your driveway though!

Krypsis

On 6/24/2010 6:26 AM, Doug Freyburger wrote:
> Omelet wrote:
>>
>> Smart cars get over 30 mpg too which is a big selling point.
>> Fluffed up SUV's and trucks don't.
>
> My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
> extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
> farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
> Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
> average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
> Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
> Focus.
>
> There are a lot of options in the small and economy ranges that do
> better than the Smart when it comes to mileage and they have larger
> crumple zones. That makes the Smart other than smart if either of those
> aspects are among your goals.

The Smart car looks startlingly small in person. You'd think it was a
lightweight, electric car but it's not. At 1800 lb it seems awful heavy
and why put in a gas engine in a micro car in this day and age?

Korean manufacturer CT&T recently announced that it would build an
electric car of even smaller dimensions in Hawaii. It's an interesting
concept - build small assembly facilities throughout the US producing
10,000 or so cars a year. Expected price for the eZone electric vehicle
starts at $8000. This belongs in the same category as the Hawaiian Grand
Prix Indycar race - I'll believe it when I see it. :-)

>
> I want a smaller than average car because I don't want to be the cause
> of crushing someone, but I don't want a car so small I end up getting
> crushed.

In article >,
brooklyn1 > wrote:

> >Maybe it's time for some facts?
> >
> >http://www.smartusa.com/smart-fortwo...del=pure_coupe
> >
> >starting at $11,990* (US$)
> >
> >Fuel consumption
> >
> >33 city/41 highway (2010 EPA estimated)
> >
> >http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/focussedan/
> >
> >US$16,290
> >
> >24 city/35 highway
>
> When do I laugh... those death traps are toys r us kiddy cars... I
> wouldn't ride in one if you gave it to me for free.
>
> This gets me there safely/comfy @ 24/mpg highway:
> http://i49.tinypic.com/24l08wk.jpg
>
> http://www.toyota.com/fjcruiser/

Not everybody can afford 24K for a car sheldon...
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

On 25/06/2010 12:31 PM, Omelet wrote:
> In >,
> > wrote:
>
>>> Maybe it's time for some facts?
>>>
>>> http://www.smartusa.com/smart-fortwo...del=pure_coupe
>>>
>>> starting at $11,990* (US$)
>>>
>>> Fuel consumption
>>>
>>> 33 city/41 highway (2010 EPA estimated)
>>>
>>> http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/focussedan/
>>>
>>> US$16,290
>>>
>>> 24 city/35 highway
>>
>> When do I laugh... those death traps are toys r us kiddy cars... I
>> wouldn't ride in one if you gave it to me for free.
>>
>> This gets me there safely/comfy @ 24/mpg highway:
>> http://i49.tinypic.com/24l08wk.jpg
>>
>> http://www.toyota.com/fjcruiser/
>
> Not everybody can afford 24K for a car sheldon...

Not even Sheldon! ;-)

And not everyone wants a vehicle that has all the styling of a military
tank! Even the colour makes it far better suited to Iraq!

Krypsis

In article >,
Krypsis > wrote:

> >> When do I laugh... those death traps are toys r us kiddy cars... I
> >> wouldn't ride in one if you gave it to me for free.
> >>
> >> This gets me there safely/comfy @ 24/mpg highway:
> >> http://i49.tinypic.com/24l08wk.jpg
> >>
> >> http://www.toyota.com/fjcruiser/
> >
> > Not everybody can afford 24K for a car sheldon...
>
> Not even Sheldon! ;-)
>
> And not everyone wants a vehicle that has all the styling of a military
> tank! Even the colour makes it far better suited to Iraq!
>
> Krypsis

Well,,, I must confess I've looked in envy at Humvees. <g>
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
*Only Irish *coffee provides in a single glass all four *essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar *and fat. --Alex Levine

On 25/06/2010 12:41 PM, Omelet wrote:
> In .au>,
> > wrote:
>
>>>> When do I laugh... those death traps are toys r us kiddy cars... I
>>>> wouldn't ride in one if you gave it to me for free.
>>>>
>>>> This gets me there safely/comfy @ 24/mpg highway:
>>>> http://i49.tinypic.com/24l08wk.jpg
>>>>
>>>> http://www.toyota.com/fjcruiser/
>>>
>>> Not everybody can afford 24K for a car sheldon...
>>
>> Not even Sheldon! ;-)
>>
>> And not everyone wants a vehicle that has all the styling of a military
>> tank! Even the colour makes it far better suited to Iraq!
>>
>> Krypsis
>
> Well,,, I must confess I've looked in envy at Humvees.<g>

Just think of the parking issues!

But then, Sheldon dreams of "pushing" his way into his local car park
with that Toyota.

Aren't we "normal people" lucky that he can't afford one!!

Krypsis

In article >,
dsi1 > wrote:


> The Smart car looks startlingly small in person. You'd think it was a
> lightweight, electric car but it's not. At 1800 lb it seems awful heavy
> and why put in a gas engine in a micro car in this day and age?

Because US buyers want gas guzzlers. The smart car in Europe came with
a tiny turbodiesel. Fuel mileage was unbelievable, but acceleration was
not good. They knew it wouldn't sell in the US, so they didn't even
try, and instead put in a gas engine with twice the power, since gas is
so cheap in the US that buyers don't care that much about fuel mileage.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:14:26 -0500, Omelet >
wrote:

> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:26:51 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
> > > extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
> > > farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
> > > Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
> > > average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
> > > Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
> > > Focus.
> >
> > As a city dweller, sure a Smart car appeals to me for *city* mileage
> > (you poopoo 5 extra miles on the highway - but I don't). Mainly I
> > like it because it can squeeze into parking spaces that no other car
> > I've owned since I sold the Fiat Spider can fit into.
>
> Then there are also donorcycles... <g>

I have no idea what that is, Om.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:13:53 -0500, Omelet >
wrote:
>
> It can be a balancing act... but my original point about the smart cars
> is that they way the structure is built, you won't get crushed.
>
> But you do get bounced rather badly.
>
> The surrounding air bags are supposed to help prevent injury from that
> from what I understand about them?

Those crash tests are not positive advertising for those cars, Om.
They only prove the "cage" doesn't buckle. They don't say passengers
come out alive and if they do, not as quadra/paraplegics. From what I
saw, minimum injury would be major damage below the waist and neck
injury.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:54:16 -1000, dsi1
> wrote:

> The Smart car looks startlingly small in person. You'd think it was a
> lightweight, electric car but it's not. At 1800 lb it seems awful heavy
> and why put in a gas engine in a micro car in this day and age?

You're right. It should have a hybrid engine, but I don't think
they're made that way in Europe either.

--
Forget the health food. I need all the preservatives I can get.

On 6/20/2010 6:52 PM, Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> Krypsis wrote:
>
>> I just tried a magnet on our stainless steel cookware. As you say, the
>> magnetic properties vary according to the alloy mix as I notice our pans
>> don't provide anywhere near as great a magnetic attraction as a piece of
>> mild steel. I used a mild steel side panel of the stove as a basis for
>> comparison. As well, all our pots have a copper base. That may make it
>> very difficult for induction cooking as the copper has zero magnetic
>> attraction.
>
> Might give it a try anyway: The way induction works, a magnetic field is
> fluctuated around the element, which causes an electric current in any metal
> nearby. That current causes the metal to heat up. Magnetic metals work
> better because of hysteresis and deeper currents, but theoretically anything
> which conducts electricity could work (and copper is a superb conductor).

The problem is that most induction cookers have a pot-sensor that relies
on magnetism and they won't turn on if there's not a magnetic pot on the
burner.

On 6/24/2010 8:02 PM, sf wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:54:16 -1000, dsi1
> > wrote:
>
>> The Smart car looks startlingly small in person. You'd think it was a
>> lightweight, electric car but it's not. At 1800 lb it seems awful heavy
>> and why put in a gas engine in a micro car in this day and age?
>
> You're right. It should have a hybrid engine, but I don't think
> they're made that way in Europe either.
>

I'm not a big fan of hybrid technology - it's way too complicated. The
important part is that it's an intermediate step between gas and all
electric cars. Internal combustion and hybrid cars and fuel cell cars
are not the future - all electric is. Well that's just my guess.

It looks like ours is a future where cars don't need oil changes, or
timing belt changes or head gasket repairs and there's no radiators to
spring leaks. We'll still have problems with dead batteries though. Heh
heh.

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:14:26 -0500, Omelet >
> wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > sf > wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:26:51 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
> > > > extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
> > > > farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
> > > > Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
> > > > average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
> > > > Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
> > > > Focus.
> > >
> > > As a city dweller, sure a Smart car appeals to me for *city* mileage
> > > (you poopoo 5 extra miles on the highway - but I don't). Mainly I
> > > like it because it can squeeze into parking spaces that no other car
> > > I've owned since I sold the Fiat Spider can fit into.
> >
> > Then there are also donorcycles... <g>
>
> I have no idea what that is, Om.

Motorcycles.
Particularly with helmetless occupants.

It's what a lot of ER personnel (and blood bank personnel where donated
tissue from cadavers is banked and issued) call them...
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
Only Irish coffee provides in a single glass all four essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar and fat. --Alex Levine

On 6/24/2010 8:02 PM, sf wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:54:16 -1000, dsi1
> > wrote:
>
>> The Smart car looks startlingly small in person. You'd think it was a
>> lightweight, electric car but it's not. At 1800 lb it seems awful heavy
>> and why put in a gas engine in a micro car in this day and age?
>
> You're right. It should have a hybrid engine, but I don't think
> they're made that way in Europe either.
>

I'm not a big fan of hybrid technology - it's way too complicated. The
important part is that it's an intermediate step between gas and all
electric cars. Internal combustion and hybrid cars and fuel cell cars
are not the future - all electric is. Well that's just my guess.

It looks like ours is a future where cars don't need oil changes, or
timing belt changes or head gasket repairs and there's no radiators to
spring leaks. We'll still have problems with dead batteries though. Heh
heh.

In article >,
"J. Clarke" > wrote:

> The problem is that most induction cookers have a pot-sensor that relies
> on magnetism and they won't turn on if there's not a magnetic pot on the
> burner.

I wonder if there is a way to over-ride that? Like placing a small
supermagnet in the bottom of the pot?
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
*Only Irish *coffee provides in a single glass all four *essential food groups: alcohol, caffeine, sugar *and fat. --Alex Levine

On 25/06/2010 7:49 PM, Omelet wrote:
> In >,
> > wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:14:26 -0500, >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In >,
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:26:51 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
>>>>> extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
>>>>> farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
>>>>> Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
>>>>> average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
>>>>> Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
>>>>> Focus.
>>>>
>>>> As a city dweller, sure a Smart car appeals to me for *city* mileage
>>>> (you poopoo 5 extra miles on the highway - but I don't). Mainly I
>>>> like it because it can squeeze into parking spaces that no other car
>>>> I've owned since I sold the Fiat Spider can fit into.
>>>
>>> Then there are also donorcycles...<g>
>>
>> I have no idea what that is, Om.
>
> Motorcycles.
> Particularly with helmetless occupants.
>
> It's what a lot of ER personnel (and blood bank personnel where donated
> tissue from cadavers is banked and issued) call them...

I like it!

I will use it amongst the motorcycling fraternity I am in contact with!

Krypsis

On 6/22/2010 6:47 PM, sf wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 18:28:21 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> As for the Smart cars..... I have seen the crash test videos and it is
>> amazing how well they stand up to high speed crashes. They don't seem to
>> have the energy absorbing crinkling that some cars have, but I don't
>> think you need to worry about it imploding on impact.
>
> If you want to go for distance on the rebound, be my guest. I'll
> stick with heavier cars for freeway driving. If all the other cars on
> the road were just as small, I'd feel differently - but they aren't.

Why do you think that you need "heavier cars for freeway driving"? How
does being on one kind of road require a different car than another?

Personally I have an SUV and a motorcycle and I don't feel any safer on
the Interstate in the SUV than I do on the bike. You're a lot less
likely to get blindsided "on the highway" than you are "around town".

On 6/22/2010 11:22 PM, sf wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:34:31 -0500, >
> wrote:
>
>> I think they also have side air bags? Or am I mistaken?
>> I can't see how the car that was "destroyed" would be more survivab
>
> I'm not talking about surviving, I'm talking about a car bouncing
> around like a rubber ball.

Why would a smaller car "bounce around like a rubber ball"?

> You may not die, but even with airbags
> there's a lot of spine and head damage from flipping and rolling.

And you can flip and roll any car, but with modern aerodynamic and
suspension design you have to do something pretty stupid to manage it.

Further, if you're worried about "flipping and rolling" you should be
driving a Corvette or some other billiard-table-on-wheels.

> I
> love those cars and am looking at one for city driving, but there's no
> way I'd use it on the freeway. Have you ever been to LA or San Diego
> as an adult? They pass you at midnight like you're standing still,
> you look at your speedometer and you're doing 70 mph. We don't drive
> that fast up here, but it's still faster than we should.

So they pass you. So what? Nobody ever died from getting passed.

On 6/25/2010 2:02 AM, sf wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:54:16 -1000, dsi1
> > wrote:
>
>> The Smart car looks startlingly small in person. You'd think it was a
>> lightweight, electric car but it's not. At 1800 lb it seems awful heavy
>> and why put in a gas engine in a micro car in this day and age?
>
> You're right. It should have a hybrid engine, but I don't think
> they're made that way in Europe either.

Well, if it was a hybrid, you'd add the weight of a generator and
electric motor and a battery to that total, and the volume to hold them all.

On 6/25/2010 6:05 AM, Omelet wrote:
> In >,
> "J. > wrote:
>
>> The problem is that most induction cookers have a pot-sensor that relies
>> on magnetism and they won't turn on if there's not a magnetic pot on the
>> burner.
>
> I wonder if there is a way to over-ride that? Like placing a small
> supermagnet in the bottom of the pot?

But that wouldn't accomplish anything. Induction heaters work because
the strong magnetic field they create is coupled to a magnetically
permeable object (the pot or pan in this case) which causes that object
to be heated.

On 6/25/2010 5:47 AM, dsi1 wrote:
> On 6/24/2010 8:02 PM, sf wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 15:54:16 -1000, dsi1
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> The Smart car looks startlingly small in person. You'd think it was a
>>> lightweight, electric car but it's not. At 1800 lb it seems awful heavy
>>> and why put in a gas engine in a micro car in this day and age?
>>
>> You're right. It should have a hybrid engine, but I don't think
>> they're made that way in Europe either.
>>
>
> I'm not a big fan of hybrid technology - it's way too complicated. The
> important part is that it's an intermediate step between gas and all
> electric cars. Internal combustion and hybrid cars and fuel cell cars
> are not the future - all electric is. Well that's just my guess.

Fuel cell _is_ all electric. You just charge the battery by putting
hydrogen in it instead of hooking wires to it.

And when I'm stuck in traffic in a New England winter, a big tank of
hydrogen is a _much_ more reassuring heat source than a half-discharged
battery.

> It looks like ours is a future where cars don't need oil changes, or
> timing belt changes or head gasket repairs and there's no radiators to
> spring leaks. We'll still have problems with dead batteries though. Heh
> heh.

On 6/25/2010 6:54 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
> On 6/22/2010 11:22 PM, sf wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:34:31 -0500, >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think they also have side air bags? Or am I mistaken?
>>> I can't see how the car that was "destroyed" would be more survivab
>>
>> I'm not talking about surviving, I'm talking about a car bouncing
>> around like a rubber ball.
>
> Why would a smaller car "bounce around like a rubber ball"?
>
>> You may not die, but even with airbags
>> there's a lot of spine and head damage from flipping and rolling.
>
> And you can flip and roll any car, but with modern aerodynamic and
> suspension design you have to do something pretty stupid to manage it.

Not uncommon for fluffed up truck drivers. They don't understand that
the SUV they are driving isn't a car. My buddy lives in a semi-rural
area and his property is located next to a strong dog leg on a two lane
road. At least once/month someone rolls a SUV into the woods at the dog
leg when they come flying down the road.


>
> Further, if you're worried about "flipping and rolling" you should be
> driving a Corvette or some other billiard-table-on-wheels.

Sure, but a Corvette doesn't have 4 personal DVD players and you can't
really intimates other drivers as well as you can with a truck...

>
>> I
>> love those cars and am looking at one for city driving, but there's no
>> way I'd use it on the freeway. Have you ever been to LA or San Diego
>> as an adult? They pass you at midnight like you're standing still,
>> you look at your speedometer and you're doing 70 mph. We don't drive
>> that fast up here, but it's still faster than we should.
>
> So they pass you. So what? Nobody ever died from getting passed.

On 6/24/2010 7:03 PM, Dan Abel wrote:
> In >,
> Doug > wrote:
>
>> Omelet wrote:
>>>
>>> Smart cars get over 30 mpg too which is a big selling point.
>>> Fluffed up SUV's and trucks don't.
>>
>> My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
>> extremely unimpressive. Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
>> farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
>> Smart on the highway. That much decrease in size compared to the
>> average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
>> Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
>> Focus.
>>
>> There are a lot of options in the small and economy ranges that do
>> better than the Smart when it comes to mileage and they have larger
>> crumple zones. That makes the Smart other than smart if either of those
>> aspects are among your goals.
>
> Maybe it's time for some facts?
>
> http://www.smartusa.com/smart-fortwo...del=pure_coupe
>
> starting at $11,990* (US$)
>
> Fuel consumption
>
> 33 city/41 highway (2010 EPA estimated)
>
> http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/focussedan/
>
> US$16,290
>
> 24 city/35 highway
>
The one friend I mentioned does high tech accident investigation and is
a stickler for accuracy and detail. He fitted his Smartcar with a good
fuel flow fuel economy meter and he meticulously records mileage and
fuel he uses.

I know this guy since college and he could never work in a marketing
department because he is really honest. He was going out of the country
on business for almost three weeks. His wife was tied up on something so
he said I could use the car if I gave him a ride to JFK.

I then had an opportunity to check the fuel economy and averaged 46 MPG
using both the meter and recording the fuel used and mileage driven.

On Jun 25, 5:42*am, Krypsis > wrote:
> On 25/06/2010 7:49 PM, Omelet wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In >,
> > * > *wrote:
>
> >> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:14:26 -0500, >
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> In >,
> >>> * > *wrote:
>
> >>>> On Thu, 24 Jun 2010 16:26:51 +0000 (UTC), Doug Freyburger
> >>>> > *wrote:
>
> >>>>> My Ford Focus gets well over 25 MPG so I find the 30 MPG of a Smart car
> >>>>> extremely unimpressive. *Doing a long drive (half tank one way or
> >>>>> farther) I get enough better mileage that I wonder if I might match the
> >>>>> Smart on the highway. * That much decrease in size compared to the
> >>>>> average car on the American road for that little change in mileage?
> >>>>> Pass. I can buy a Honda Civic and beat the Smart. Probably even a new
> >>>>> Focus.
>
> >>>> As a city dweller, sure a Smart car appeals to me for *city* mileage
> >>>> (you poopoo 5 extra miles on the highway - but I don't). *Mainly I
> >>>> like it because it can squeeze into parking spaces that no other car
> >>>> I've owned since I sold the Fiat Spider can fit into.
>
> >>> Then there are also donorcycles...<g>
>
> >> I have no idea what that is, Om.
>
> > Motorcycles.
> > Particularly with helmetless occupants.
>
> > It's what a lot of ER personnel (and blood bank personnel where donated
> > tissue from cadavers is banked and issued) call them...
>
> I like it!
>
> I will use it amongst the motorcycling fraternity I am in contact with!

A friend of mine is quadriplegic. When he was in the paralysis ward
there were 20 other patients. He, and 19 others were there because of
motorcycle accidents. One had jumped or dived into water that was too
shallow.
>
> Krypsis

--Bryan