Video: Chris Harris Reviews The Toyota GT 86 For...

Crash tests show ForTwo not so smart

 
37 1,650 views April 3, 2008

Crash tests show ForTwo not so smart

Crash tests show ForTwo not so smart

Enlarge Photo
Incredible demand has created a waiting list for buyers trying to get their hands on a Smart ForTwo in its first year of official U.S. sales. Strong fuel efficiency, easy urban maneuverability and a very positive image have all contributed to the sales success, but now that the NHTSA's first round of tests are out, the Smart's image may no longer be an asset.

The results show the ForTwo scores four of five stars for driver protection in a frontal impact, but only three stars for the passenger. Worse, the rating is based on a collision with a similarly-sized car - a near impossibility, statistically, on American roads. The results would almost certainly be much worse against a larger vehicle, reports CNN.

Not that three stars is particularly good, even against another Smart - the rating equates to a 21 to 35 percent chance of serious injury.

Side-impact ratings are a perfect five stars, however, despite the door popping open during the test. Getting thrown from the car is a dangerous proposition, but the ForTwo protects the occupants well up to that point.

Roll-over resistance scores a mere three stars again, likely thanks to its short, narrow wheelbase and high center of gravity. The three-star rating puts it in the company of SUVs and tall trucks and indicates a 21 percent likelihood of tipping in a crash - not exactly confidence inspiring.



Tags:
Posted in:
 
Contribute
Send us a tip Comment Contact the editor
Follow Us

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

  • Posting indicates you have read this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
Comments (37)

  1. By Fritz Posted: 4/3/2008 2:51pm PDT

    Yes, don't save money. Be afraid and buy lots and lots of SUVs. And DO NOT look under the bed...............
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  2. By Jim Posted: 4/3/2008 4:10pm PDT

    I wonder how my motorcycles would do in these test?
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  3. By chris Posted: 4/3/2008 4:16pm PDT

    no... its not that bad fritz, its just,... think about the car that you're buying, and the environment that you're buying it in. simply put, a smart car is stupid if you plan on doing any highway travel. and I'm sorry but when my focus gets 40mpg on the highway, why would you ever stick your self in that car? I don't know if the new focus has been crash rated but it certainly will be over 3 stars.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  4. By Gus Posted: 4/3/2008 5:10pm PDT

    The Focus is a tank compared to that tiny little deathtrap.
    It'll get a bad rap soon enough in this country. You'll see a nice show on 20/20 sometime pitting it against a normal car like an Accord and seeing the dummy's legs shoved though it's spine.
    Maybe they should have Fritz sit in it? I'm sure he'd be willing...
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  5. By Fritz Posted: 4/3/2008 5:32pm PDT

    OK. You live in LA, average speed hwy/city combine, or even all hwy, not much difference? That's not fair, how about New York... Wait, Seatlle? Damn, well, I guess I get the point anyway though... how about, why demonize something that's unsafe by your standards, instead of just live and let live and let the market decide? I already have a much less safe vehicle, a 76 lancia scorpion, so whoops?
    Try this on, how much harder is it to make solid impact on something that small? It'll go mostly under or slip out from under most SUVs. But the NHTSA doesn't do real world testing, just nonsense that generates revenue. And Jim said it, there are far scarier things to be in. But Koolaid tastes good, I know.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  6. By Fritz Posted: 4/3/2008 5:33pm PDT

    Oh, and they did a test hitting a wall at 65. You ain't seen it? Held up very well...
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  7. By Gus Posted: 4/3/2008 7:50pm PDT

    I demonize it because the crash tests don't show what happens in a real world crash.
    That to me is lying to the public in order to make a sale.
    There are lots of complete idiots out there who have no idea about the most basic of physics, and they will die in the name of fuel economy and green worship...

    Oh, and they did a test aginst a wall at 65? Yes, I saw it, and no, it didn't do very well. Why? Because most people obviously don't know anything about crash dynamics. Even if the passenger cabin is untouched, the deceleration forces on the dummies was in excess of 50 G's for less then 20 milliseconds. That is fatal to internal organs (torn aorta, collapsed lungs, etc) and the brain (where it impacts the front of the skull), and way more than the brain stem can handle, leading to what is called "Basilar Skull Fracture". Don't believe me? Ask Dale Earnhart. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilar_skull_fracture for more info.
    The reason why such a high G force over such a short moment? NO CRUSH SPACE. There is simply not enough distance between impact point and feet to slow the vehicle down at a contolled and progressive pace.
    Like the article says, not so smart...
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  8. By Leland Posted: 4/3/2008 7:55pm PDT

    "Side-impact ratings are a perfect five stars, however, despite the door popping open during the test. Getting thrown from the car is a dangerous proposition, but the ForTwo protects the occupants well up to that point."

    They were being objective right up to the second sentence. Well, if you didn't have your seatbelt on, you'd probably be dead or severely injured in WHATEVER you're driving.

    "Be afraid and buy lots and lots of SUVs."
    @Fritz: Exactly
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  9. By Gus Posted: 4/3/2008 7:55pm PDT

    Oh, and let's not even talk about hitting a car with twice the mass.
    Ever take physics?
    In a perfect collision, head on, let's say, the Smart will be decelrated, and the ACCELERATED BACKWARDS at an unbelievable rate.
    The people in the heavier car will decelerate and then keep going, pushing the other car backwards.
    And even if the structure holds up, the people in the Smart will look mostly uninjured, and dead.
    My friend who has been with the CHP has seen this twice with Mini Coopers. Occupants look fine, but both died before the helicopter arrived.
    So go ahead, take your chances...
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  10. By Leland Posted: 4/3/2008 8:03pm PDT

    "Oh, and let’s not even talk about hitting a car with twice the mass."

    By the same logic, with all the 18 wheelers on the road 24/7, no matter what you drive...you'll die sooner or later. So I guess I'll save a little money in the mean time...or go to truck driving school. :D
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  11. By admin Posted: 4/3/2008 8:28pm PDT

    Leland - we are not against small cars. However you have to look at the fact that American is a completely different market to Europe, where the Smart was conceived and built.

    We spent 4 days in Milan recently and saw hundreds of the little Smart cars zipping around the city streets. In the whole period we were there we saw only a couple of SUVs - and these were the small "soft-roader" type. Does the Smart make sense in Milan? Heck yes.

    Does it make so much sense in America? Not so much when you consider the other cars on the road.

    Fritz - do you really think we favor SUVs on this site? Or that we have an agenda to push products by companies selling them?
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  12. By Randy Posted: 4/3/2008 8:45pm PDT

    Smarts will make plenty of sense when gas prices force the behemoths of the roads. I agree with comments above - let the buyer make their own decisions. I have a Smart on it's way, currently drive a TT and had a MINI before that, I LIKE small cars, they're fun, economical, and make a lot more sense than an SUV. Maybe if people would pay more attention to their driving and less time to phone calls and DVD players, they could simply avoid crashes. If the Smart is So wrong, evil, and stupid, then we had better take the scooters and motorcycles off the road as well.

    How about first we ban cellphone use while driving, make the penalty for running red lights more than a slap on the wrist, and get serious with DWI enforcement. These are the people that are the problem.

    Crash avoidance has always been my plan to stay alive...gee, what a concept. I don't know why microcars are viewed as such a threat. If you don't want one, don't buy one - and drive your 10mpg truck whenever you can scrape together the cash.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  13. By Gus Posted: 4/3/2008 9:37pm PDT

    People who ride motorcycles understand the risks, Smart owners don't
    I'm sure plenty of people plan to stay alive by avoiding accidents altogether, but unless your name is God, I doubt everyone with this plan will be successful.

    Good luck out there!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  14. By Randy Posted: 4/3/2008 10:11pm PDT

    Gus, if a person drives a car and doesn't understand the risks then they're not intelligent enough to be on the road. SUV owners apparently don't understand the risk - they have the thoughts that they are large and therefore safe, but how many do we see every night flipped and/or totaled. Like I said before, maybe if people would just take driving as seriously as it should be considered, everyone will fare much better.

    My plan to drive with my eyes open and my brain in gear has worked for 36 years so far. I COULD'VE had lots of accidents if I drove as mindlessly as most that I see out on the road. The car isn't what kills you - it's usually the idiots that are around you or the nut behind the wheel.

    Please don't group Smart owners with the common drivers. At least the initial buyers are car people, and fully understand what driving is all about, and the risk involved.

    Hey, maybe the people that want the large cars are just compensating for something else that they're lacking.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  15. By RB Posted: 4/3/2008 10:19pm PDT

    Rather than ban small cars and motorbikes - why not get to the cause of the problem - and ban the big SUVs etc - before they get priced out of the market by fuel, emisions and taxes!

    After all I see no reason for the majority of US and Aussie buyers to drive round in these tanks - especially as probably 80 percent of the time there is only one person in the vehicle!!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  16. By Perry Posted: 4/3/2008 10:57pm PDT

    I own my Honda Goldwing motorcycle and was used to be driven on my risk like to any other vehicles, but always think positively. Why can't I do with Smart? I would buy Smart Fortwo for my second vehicle to use as commute in the big city. I do not know if Smart will be value worth in few years when gas price will go blast, people will have to need smaller vehicles like Smart which is the best safety in accident in it's class in other country, that what I read. American vehicles have big different vary of sizes to make Smart look bad. Supposed if all american vehicles are no longer SUV, van and truck, Smart must be very good in competetion with other small cars.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  17. By Alex Posted: 4/4/2008 1:02am PDT

    I live in LA area and commute about 50 miles to my university! THe smart car would not make sense for highway driving out here.. hwoever, inner city commute such as new york or chicago it might make sense. I've recently seen a ocuple smarts here on the highways and all I can say is "No thanks!" Drive safe y'all
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  18. By Fritz Posted: 4/4/2008 1:18am PDT

    @admin: this site pro SUV? No. The NHTSA, what makes it's income off taxes ie from large expensive vehicles and then the taxes from all that gas they consume, yes. Called a conflict of interest.

    Ok, everyone KNOWS a CHP blah blah, ever been in said type of accident? My internal organs still exist and function, not that I'm proud of my experience per se, but I get so sick of hearing about this internal organ nonsense. 9/10 it's an elderly couple or a sick kid, etc, etc. So I can combat those things with 1st hand knowledge, not passed on BS, until you can come at me with experience, which I don't hope for, tough beans. SUVs are more likely to roll, or blow a tire out, or lose control, etc. Can't have it all?

    However just a couple weeks ago a fatal wreck involving an suv rear ended by a big rig, fatal a couple times over, on a local FREEWAY no less...? Right back where we started: propaganda. People buying smarts are not Mad Max toiling across the desert at speed for hours at a time or Steve McQueen, get real. To insinuate smart drivers are stupid shows a complete loss for argument, a cop out if you will.

    Moreover...how many freeways run perpendicular to each other at intersections??? Not a lot of T-bones occur on the highway... Another 1st hand example, got sideswiped by an Insight, and I jerked away quickly, and escaped with minimal fender damage instead of holding firm while his car welded itself to mine and created a total loss, so maybe getting tossed, especially sideways, can be a good thing and avoids the G force thingy, hmmm? Dispersing the momentum across the road instead of the car? I like it, sounds safer the more I think about it.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  19. By Jesse Posted: 4/4/2008 2:38am PDT

    How can Gus say ALL Smart drivers don't understand risk? It's typical American generalization. Being an ex-American (immigrated to South Africa) I can see both sides of the story. First of all, driving is dangerous period. A video shown at the launch of the new Smart showed it hitting an S-Class head on and it survived well. What's safer about an Escalade when a log can come through the windscreen and knock your head off? Why are guys like Gus so afraid of change? I love big cars too and defend them at the opposite end of the spectrum in SA. By the way, I recently road tested the new Smart on an open road trip through SA and it worked beautifully. Where it stumbles is its crap tranny, where it works overtime in CITY conditions. Oh, and I didn't crash, so I'm home safe now.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  20. By chris Posted: 4/4/2008 8:39am PDT

    The fact of the matter, and Gus and Admin nailed it, is that crash testing is done against a static wall. basically, the Smart car gets a 3 star rating.......... WHEN IT HITS ITSELF. thats the point.

    so, you're passenger has a 20 to 35% chance of serious injury....... if you're hitting one of the other 4 smart cars in your town. the focus is a full 1000 lbs heavier than this car. your chances just went up.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  21. By Randy Posted: 4/4/2008 9:41am PDT

    Huh?
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  22. By Gus Posted: 4/4/2008 9:54am PDT

    It's ok, Chris, Randy and Fritz and the others are like Al Gore and global warming, no matter how much science you throw in their face, they'll always think they're right. They actually think because "the car did quite well" that the people inside did too. They probably think the last ice age (and subsequent global warming) was caused by SUV's.
    I'm tired of arguing. Let them drive their smart cars, never get in any accidents, and I'm sure they will all be just fine.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  23. By Randy Posted: 4/4/2008 10:04am PDT

    Just stick your head in the sand Gus, you'll be okay too.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  24. By Gus Posted: 4/4/2008 10:15am PDT

    Randy, make sure you send Ken Livingston a Christmas card this year, won't you?

    Wow, 24 commments, this is a hot issue. I love a good debate...
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  25. By Randy Posted: 4/4/2008 10:21am PDT

    I think I will, anyone that refers to Bush as, "'the greatest threat to life on this planet,' is okay in my book.

    Gus...sand...go back to sleep. I'm outta here, I have an environment to save.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  26. By Gus Posted: 4/4/2008 10:31am PDT

    Don't forget your cape... :)
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  27. By Fritz Posted: 4/4/2008 10:38am PDT

    You don't love debate, you didn't like the topic so you changed it to global warming.

    UN just admitted the globe's been cooling since 98 if that helps the burn Gus.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  28. By Gus Posted: 4/4/2008 11:06am PDT

    Oh Fritz, just stop. I do love debate, it's healthy to get other people's views!
    I didn't change the debate to global warming, others did. I was focused on the safety (or lack thereof) of this car, just as the original article states...
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  29. By Randy Posted: 4/4/2008 11:24am PDT

    Okay, back on topic. I'm getting my Smart, I won't be involved in any crashes, and we can all buy the car we want, (or can afford) since the last time I looked we're still a free country.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  30. By Gus Posted: 4/4/2008 2:36pm PDT

    Bingo.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  31. By Gus Posted: 4/4/2008 3:59pm PDT

    30 comments?
    Done. :)
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  32. By The Dude Posted: 4/4/2008 4:50pm PDT

    To each his Own, as they say, but I'm w/ the Smart Cars Ain't Group...for limited, intra-city driving in select locales, I think the Smart can be a wonderful accessory to save time over the more plebian subways/bus route scene...but you're gonna need help from a deity should you ever be unfortunate enough to collide w/ anything larger than a well fed House Cat.

    However, even though the SmartTwo rolls on four wheels, I'm definitely more inclined to consider the SmartTwo more of a motorcycle w/ roof than True Car...
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  33. By Randy Posted: 4/4/2008 5:13pm PDT

    "...but you’re gonna need help from a deity should you ever be unfortunate enough to collide w/ anything larger than a well fed house cat."

    Give me a break.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  34. By Gus Posted: 4/4/2008 6:46pm PDT

    Oh no, here we go again...

    The only way to actually solve this riddle is if someone does some tests, with dummies wired for deceleration forces, so it can be determined if the humans they represent would be damaged internally.

    All you'd need is 2 smart cars, and two new Ford Taurus' or something of similar, medium size (average size for America, let's say, I don't think using a full size SUV is going to be worthwhile). Then conduct one test at 35mph, and another at say 55-60 mph. Or maybe a head on test and side-on test? These cars are causing enough controversy that when they become more popular in this country (I've already seen 5 of them here in Newport Beach, Southern California) that statistics or tests will prove me right or wrong one way or another.
    Hopefully I'm wrong, but like I said, without real tests (and not just for intrusion) it's all educated speculation...
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  35. By Randy Posted: 4/4/2008 10:22pm PDT

    No we don't...just a reaction to a stupid comment.

    If you're scared, don't buy one - simple.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  36. By Jesse Posted: 4/8/2008 5:10am PDT

    Sheesh! And you guys don't even have the Smart Roadster! Or the Smart ForFour. Or the first generation ForTwo.......
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  37. By Francisco Posted: 8/19/2008 12:15pm PDT

    I have one smart for two years now (the previous version, smaler then the new one) and i just LOVE it. I also have an Mercedes Slk and i'm thinking in selling it and buying a second hand Smart Roadstar. If i want to feel some adrenalyn with the Slk i have to drive Real Fast... With the Smart i can enjoy myself whille driving at much lower speeds! Suv's are so dangerous to people in the streets.. They sould be banned. Smaller cars like the smart are much easier to drive that big cars so it's much less probable to have one accident with them... Francisco (from Portugal)
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

Research New Cars

Go!


More from High Gear Media

 
 
MotorAuthority
  • Follow Us
  • Twiiter
  • Facebook
 
 
© 2011 MotorAuthority. All Rights Reserved. MotorAuthority is published by High Gear Media. Stock photography by Homestar, LLC. Send us feedback.
 

Use the form below to send us a tip, give us feedback, or just say hello.

(max 750 characters)