I'm suspicious about that EPA fuel efficiency rating. I know they revised the system to supposedly make it more closely reflect "real" driving conditions, but every database of user experience I look at says the old rating for my car was more accurate. My old rating was 34 combined, my new rating is something like 29, I'm currently getting 35.

Given that, I'd expect the true mpg of the Smart to be back at their 40+mpg estimates when they were first petitioning to be allowed on US highways.

I think the gas engine in the smart just isn't that good. With a better one (more advanced, maybe with a better transmission), it could probably do better.

Having driven a smart car for a couple thousand kilometers recently, I have to say that the 36mpg figure is very pessimistic. In fact, I would say ALL of the new EPA figures are on the pessimistic side(while the old ones were extremely optimistic). I didn't keep exact tabs, on my fuel consumption(I was on vacation), but at worst, it was 40mpg, but I think a closer figure was more like 42mpg. This includes quite alot of highway driving at around 70mph and alot of stop and go city driving.
My normal car is rated by the new EPA adjustment to be under 30mpg mixed. I've had it over 40mpg doing 75mph, and my normal driving routine(8 miles to work, to the store, etc) is 32-35mpg. If I try, I can do 38mpg, and if I'm feeling aggressive it's never been below 30mpg.
That's just my experience, but it bugs me that people are so hard on the smart because the EPA's rating is so low.

To those who talk about the new EPA estimates, remember that there's a good chance that you guys are driving more efficiently than the average person (just by the fact that you are here commenting on TH).

Anon, it's true that I MIGHT be driving more efficiently. But I am also a car enthusiast, and I do like to drive fast and hard. I try to keep myself under control, but sometimes I just have to put my foot in it. That's especially true when you give me a new toy to play with such as a rental smart.

As for the engine, I felt it was complete adequate. Yes, it could have been a bit more advanced, but I don't think there's anything wrong with it. The transmission, i have to agree. A bit crisper on the shifts would have been a VERY welcome change.

if they put out the biodiesel version here inthe US i'll get one. theres no way im looking like a douchebag for 30mpg on regular gas

The EPA mileage numbers might be pessimistic, but the same can be said for something like the Hybrid Civic, which I get about 48.8 mpg in, combined city/highway driving (or did before L.A., now I'm down to 44.5 combined 'cause the stop-and-go is so bad here.) I paid $18,600 for my car new in 2004, not all that much more than a smart considering I have four doors and can seat 5.

From my perspective, the problem with NEVs (neighborhood electric vehicles) and cars the size of the Smart is that I'd rather ride my bicycle or motorcycle to the same location as a micro car. I think NEVs are ridiculous because people should be riding bicycles. The Smart isn't as limited, but it isn't all that much more useful than a motorcycle, unless it's raining.

In Austria in 2000 there was a real Smart Car dispenser, very clever...

http://gadgetopia.com/post/3140

great blog will visit again

Man buys a new 3/4 ton pickup, drives to Florida and back and gets such phenominal gas mileage he took it back to the dealer to get gas guage checked. Nothing wrong with it. He's scratching his head-WOW! Suddenly the mfg wants to buy it back and offers him new trucks for two years, 2 yr gas card - but now he is suspicious. He finds out that this truck and certain cars are explicity mfg'd for the exec's at the main headquarters with better gas milage, and I mean much betteer than you are allowed to get, and this one got by somehow. He had to hide the thing to keep them from stealing it back. Bend over America, the greedy, amoral, leaders of the auto industry are raping you right in front of your face.

Nice urban legend, William.

The problem with most of these conspiracy theories is that they involved A LOT of people. Hundreds and thousands of people (engineers, etc), and you only need ONE of these people to talk for the secret to be out, or for one of the carmakers to decide that they'll make more money by making cars that are a lot more efficient than their rivals so screw the secret..

Makes for a good story, but doesn't mean it's true.

I've owned my Smart Cabriolet for about a month and a half. I absolutely LOVE it!! It took a while for the shifting to get smoother, but I think it's breaking in nicely. I have to say, though, that the gas mileage is a bit disappointing. I drive a lot of city, some highway (although it tends to be stop and go on the way to work), and I get around 36mpg (disclaimer: I drive with my roof open almost everywhere I go). It's not as efficient as a hybrid, but it looks a lot cooler -- and it's a convertible (perfect for Southern California). In a land of giant SUVs and pick-up trucks (San Diego), it certainly stands out. I get a lot of attention and people asking me about the car. I could have bought a Yaris or a Fit for less money and maybe just as good mileage (although not according to EPA), but what other micro-car is a convertible?! In my opinion, the Smart is much more stylish than its fuel efficient competitors, and being a designer whose boyfriend is a class car buff, I had to look cool! Okay, maybe not terribly cool, but definitely cute and fun! In the meantime, I'm learning how to hypermile (or just drive more efficiently), to try to get those numbers up. It's going to take some practice, but my goal is 40mpg.

Greta little Car - I'd like to get one.

Apparently driving at 70mph rather than 80mph cuts CO2 emissions by almost a third. Basically for any car you're never going to achieve the mileage on the packet. But I didn't realise that the WAY you drive a car can have as big as impact as WHAT you drive until I read this BBC article:

Check it out...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bloom/flash.shtml#/actions/ecodriving.shtml

The new Toyota Avalons are rated at 33 mpg hwy. Makes you think the Smart Car should get at least three times that, huh? I think they're cute but safety is a big concern for me. It seems such an uneven match butting heads with a Suburban or an Expedition...........or a Honda Accord for that matter.

Speaking of the Honda Accord, aren't they marketing one in Britian now that gets 50+ mpg with a "clean" diesel? If so a clean diesel in a Smart car should do around 150 mpg don't you think?

Maybe a scooter????

I would consider the Canadian diesel version which was getting 75mpg. There's no sense in purchasing a 36mpg microcar. To me it defeats the entire purpose. My Mitsubishi Lancer GTS can hypermile at 40-42 - so why would I sacrifice so much?

Give me the 3cyl and we're in business.

i have been getting mid 40's for my daily commutes, i rarely see an open road (today's powerball lotto run, for instance). but i have logged 53mpg in my smart (451) at speeds of 55-60mph on one tank of gas. i think the smart may be capable of 60+mpg at speeds of 40-45mph for long distances.

i live in illinois and the posted minimum is 45mph on all roads, with other cars i got snide looks when doing this (in college i had a 1968 pontiac 4 door with a 400 V8 and would get 16mpg at 45, and the car was big enough not to be "messed with") with the smart on semi-congested roads, i hang back in the right lane at 55-60mph and enjoy the stares, waves, grins and thumbs ups.

if americans weren't in such a rush (i oversleep sometimes and try to speed to work, i've had my little smart up to 80mph to make up for time, when the traffic allows) i'd keep my smart to a 45mph maximum and reap the rewards.

i feel the EPA messed up royally with the smart ratings, i'd rate the smart at 43mpg city and 53mpg highway. (if you keep it at 75mph it drops to 39mpg)