Time For a Smaller Car Standard?

[Puzzel]

Originally Posted by DiRF

People that continually automatically think the Smart car is a deathtrap without actually learning about how safe it really is...
<.....>
Size =/= safety in a crash.

Its amazing how this myth (size & safety) has been perpetuated. When the SUV craze started, they were actually the most un-safe vehicles on the road. And the only reason they're any better today is because of all the nanny-stuff that the government regulated into them, ie air bags, stability control, etc.

In fact, there are currently different safety regulations depending major vehicle type. Trucks (and SUVs) have different regulations than cars. So I see no reason for an A-Segment or KEI specific regulation.

I would love to have the opportunity to buy a micro-Suburban that gets 40-50 mpg in the city -- I love the 67-72 GM pickup style, and would be the perfect compliment to a new Camaro in the garage. Or maybe a 4x4 COE for weekend excursions into the backwoods. Unfortunately, this isn't the land of choice & freedom -- its the land of government regulations and loudest lobbying groups.

[Saturn69]

The smart fortwo has been tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, here are the results. And remember, the IIHS test is more severe than the one the NHTSA does.

As for it being dangerous, I guess the Canadians I met in town have more testicular fortitude than most Americans, considering they drove their 70mpg (hey, they said they had used the A/C for part of the trip) diesel fortwo from Manitoba on their way to Texas. We seem to be afraid of everything lately, thanks to the media's terrorist tactics to sell more 'news'.

[KingElvis]

Originally Posted by AndrewGS

I think one of the overlooked points Ming and others have made is that the protection offered by microcars is better than the zero protection offered by bicycles, mopeds, scooters and motorcycles.

To put in Fonz speak..."Exactamundo!"

What if the occupants had to wear helmets (in states with helmet laws) and we just called them 'Four wheel cycles' or 'enclosed four wheel cycles.'

[psece]

Originally Posted by Saturn69

The smart fortwo has been tested by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, here are the results. And remember, the IIHS test is more severe than the one the NHTSA does.

As for it being dangerous, I guess the Canadians I met in town have more testicular fortitude than most Americans, considering they drove their 70mpg (hey, they said they had used the A/C for part of the trip) diesel fortwo from Manitoba on their way to Texas. We seem to be afraid of everything lately, thanks to the media's terrorist tactics to sell more 'news'.

Here is the video! Even the IHSS spokesman was saying that the bigger the car, the safer you tend to be.

A great starter for the American Top Gear would be a offset crash between the Smart and a new Suburban. Then all this could be put to rest....

Edit: I am surprised they gave the Frontal Crash 4 stars as the dummies head hit the steering wheel...

[Saturn69]

Originally Posted by EllwynX

It would end up affecting everyone in larger vehicles (I'm not talking about JUST SUV's and trucks) when the people driving those tiny cars start realizing the death rate for them is so much higher than other, safer vehicles. They will then cry about it and make a big enough stink to get those that prefer driving something safer, but less efficient, will have to pay some kind of price.

Do you live in the same country as I do? Paranoia much?

Originally Posted by EllwynX

I drive a car that's small currently ('05 Aveo) and hate it. I much prefer a larger vehicle for both comfort, fun to drive AND safety.

That's your freedom of choice, I prefer to drive smaller. What a great Country we live in that allows us to not only drive the vehicle of our choice (that meets our Federal safety and emissions standards) and allows us to debate our choices. Cool, isn't it?

Originally Posted by EllwynX

As long as those Smart drivers are willing to sign a waiver that binds them to an understanding they don't get treated special for wanting to drive a deathtrap, well then let them drive on the roads with the others.

Now you want to punish people who choose to drive a car that scores higher than your Aveo in crash tests? How about we put an extra tax on SUV owners because they take up more space and use more gas? That sounds about as fair (and stupid) as your 'smart waiver' idea. They don't get special treatment for driving a smart, they don't ask for any either. Where are you getting this crap?

Originally Posted by EllwynX

Why not just allow Mopeds and other small cycle-like vehicles on the roads along with rest of everyone too since Motorcycles are allowed? That's about the same comparison as having a Smart car on the highway with larger cars...

Here in Iowa:

Iowa Moped Laws
Bicycle Definition
A bicycle is classified as one of the following:
(1) A device having two wheels and having at least one saddle or seat for the use of a rider, which is propelled by human power.
(2) A device having two or three wheels with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts (one horsepower), whose maximum speed on a paved level surface, when powered solely by such a motor while ridden, is less than 20 miles per hour.


New Moped Definition
A "motorized bicycle," or moped, is motor vehicle having a saddle or a seat for the use of a rider, designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground, and not capable of operating at a speed in excess of 30 miles per hour on level ground unassisted by human power. The maximum speed of 30mph needs to be printed on the certificate of origin from the manufacturer.

The new definition for a moped written above replaces the reference to "an engine having a displacement of no greater than 50c.c." The change in the definition allows electric motors or electric engines to be used as a source for moped propulsion.

Additionally, for a moped to be classified as a motor vehicle, it must be able to travel at a speed of atleast 20mph while driving up a 3 percent grade. If a vehicle cannot go 20mph up a 3 percent grade, it is not permitted to be operated on Iowa's streets and roadways.
Now, just because you don't like the kei cars, or smarts, because of your fear of being mangled or maimed, doesn't justify a uh, educationally deficient post such as the one above. You choose what you want, we kei car lovers will choose what we like. No one is forcing you to do anything buy obey the traffic laws, we'll watch out for ourselves since it seems to be beneath you to watch out for others on the road. Well, it sounds that way with all your "Kei Car Death-Highway Bloodfest" crap. Driving a Kei car is NOT Hostell III on wheels. Keep buying into the fear, go on.......your media thanks you.

[Saturn69]

Originally Posted by psece

Here is the video! Even the IHSS spokesman was saying that the bigger the car, the safer you tend to be.

A great starter for the American Top Gear would be a offset crash between the Smart and a new Suburban. Then all this could be put to rest....

Edit: I am surprised they gave the Frontal Crash 4 stars as the dummies head hit the steering wheel...

Well duh, my 12 year old son knows that larger cars can be safer. The point is the smart is NOT the deathtrap most think it is. It's as safe as a car that size can be. The owners who drive them realize they aren't a mini-Abrams tank, they aren't stupid, but they also tend to drive more defensively than, say, someone in an SUV who takes it for granted that the vehicle will do the saving so all the driver has to do is apply makeup...er, drive the thing. Don't worry, those of us who CHOOSE to own smaller cars are watching out for ya, SUV owners. We'll drive safely for the both of us since we know we won't stand up to your largess and corpulence.

[Saturn69]

Originally Posted by DiRF

People that continually automatically think the Smart car is a deathtrap without actually learning about how safe it really is... :facepalm:

Also, the British show Fifth Gear ran a crashtest between a subcompact 5-star rated Renault versus a large, hulking 10-year-old Volvo wagon head-on, and the Renault came out the undeniable victor. The occupants in the Renault would have survived very well, and the occupants in the Volvo would have been worse-off.

Size =/= safety in a crash.

Why do any research? Why not eat the fear and ignorance that the media is bound and determined to keep pushing on us? It's easier just to ignore that there are other options for transporation because, OMIGOD, it would make my choice seem stupid if I found something else that worked just as well for less money/gas. Humans aren't very bright, are we? And what some of these people seem to forget, you know, the "I can afford the gas" crowd, is that demand affects price, the price of gas affects food, affects the economy, effects peoples lives. Use less, pay less. Whodathunk? Spending less on fuel means you have more to spend on stuff that actually improves your quality of life. Buy an inefficient vehicle and more and more of your money goes to keeping that vehicle moving, taking more and more away from the cable, phone, food and just about anything else so as to keep the Tanker rolling.

[Saturn69]

Originally Posted by psece

Here is the video! Even the IHSS spokesman was saying that the bigger the car, the safer you tend to be.

A great starter for the American Top Gear would be a offset crash between the Smart and a new Suburban. Then all this could be put to rest....

Edit: I am surprised they gave the Frontal Crash 4 stars as the dummies head hit the steering wheel...

There will be fewer and fewer Suburbans on the streets as gas prices rise. Smarts will become more common, then they'll get like 7 or 8 of them in 'gangs' and they'll all pounce on the wounded water buffalos that are SUV's.

[psece]

Originally Posted by Saturn69

Well duh, my 12 year old son knows that larger cars can be safer. The point is the smart is NOT the deathtrap most think it is. It's as safe as a car that size can be. The owners who drive them realize they aren't a mini-Abrams tank, they aren't stupid, but they also tend to drive more defensively than, say, someone in an SUV who takes it for granted that the vehicle will do the saving so all the driver has to do is apply makeup...er, drive the thing. Don't worry, those of us who CHOOSE to own smaller cars are watching out for ya, SUV owners. We'll drive safely for the both of us since we know we won't stand up to your largess and corpulence.

No, people don't know that. They only know what marketing tells them half the time and the other half they believe whatever they are reading on the forums.

As one of the few who get to CHOOSE a smaller car to drive, I am sure you will keep me safe (While I am being a smart A$$, I appreciate anyone who pays attention while driving any vehicle). And I am hoping that my largess and corpulence isn't too great of a burden for ya. But the reality is that Kei cars will more than likely be bought as first cars. The least experienced people will be in these small, cheap cars. And while Kei cars are small, I am sure that there is enough room for makeup, cell phone, pda, ipod, small monkeys, etc. So the same problem of not paying attention will exist for the "special people" who get the privilege to drive the Kei cars. So it will be just a matter of time before a "Ralph Nader" and the insurance companies gets a hold of the Kei car and ruins it.

I will hold to my original argument that technology will enable efficiency in bigger vehicles so that we don't have drive tin cans. That or Robert Heinlein's "Moving Roads" will take over.....

[Tone]

I think a class of cars that doesn't meet the same safety standards as larger cars would be problematic. Motorcycles and mopeds are clearly a different kind of vehicle than cars. In most jurisdictions, they require a different kind of license. It's recommended (or mandated) that you wear a helmet. Nobody in their right mind gets on a motorcyle or scooter and expects car-levels of crash protection.

But, a smaller car still looks like a car. How would Mr. and Mrs. Uniformed Consumer make an informed decision about buying such a vehicle. Many would buy one and assume the same level of protection as any other car.

People should be allowed to make choices, but they need to be fully aware of what the choice is.

I've long wondered if you could build a very light car and get resonable crash protection by mandating four or five point racing belts (i.e. you are one with the seat) and a helmet. That might be an interesting way to get a safe, light cheap vehicle that offers the weather protection of a car and clearly requires something different of its operator (so the understand what they are getting into).

[Saturn69]

Originally Posted by Tone

I think a class of cars that doesn't meet the same safety standards as larger cars would be problematic. Motorcycles and mopeds are clearly a different kind of vehicle than cars. In most jurisdictions, they require a different kind of license. It's recommended (or mandated) that you wear a helmet. Nobody in their right mind gets on a motorcyle or scooter and expects car-levels of crash protection.

But, a smaller car still looks like a car. How would Mr. and Mrs. Uniformed Consumer make an informed decision about buying such a vehicle. Many would buy one and assume the same level of protection as any other car.

People should be allowed to make choices, but they need to be fully aware of what the choice is.

I've long wondered if you could build a very light car and get resonable crash protection by mandating four or five point racing belts (i.e. you are one with the seat) and a helmet. That might be an interesting way to get a safe, light cheap vehicle that offers the weather protection of a car and clearly requires something different of its operator (so the understand what they are getting into).

They DO meet the same Federal safety standards.

[DiRF]

Originally Posted by Puzzel

I would love to have the opportunity to buy a micro-Suburban that gets 40-50 mpg in the city -- I love the 67-72 GM pickup style, and would be the perfect compliment to a new Camaro in the garage.

...and I believe those micro-Suburbans are based on Suzuki Lapins, so it'd still technically be a pseudo-GM product

[benroethig]

Originally Posted by AndrewGS

I was just looking at those DAMD kits and noticed the Heart Beat.

http://www.damd.co.jp/products/suzuki/wagonr11_hb.html



EDIT: OMFG!!! The maker of the Sub-Suburbans makes mini Chevy and Dodge vans too!



http://www.blow-net.co.jp/

Imagine a tiny A-Team van!!!

I Pitty the fool who thinks Mr. Can fit into one though.

[61BelAir]

If there's a market for them, then I believe GM should address that market. GM may be late to the market, but better late then never.

[MCGARRETT]

I have been following this thread for about a day or so, and I have to agree that there are some valid arguments on both sides, though if you think that a Kei car is a deathtrap, then what a we to do with people who are out there drving 10, 15 or GASP, 20 year old compact and subcompact cars, in FLA I regularly see a neo-lithic era 1985 Cavaliers, Civics HX, Tercels, Metro XFi's, 1st and 2nd gen Hyundai Excels, or even.....an original Beetle! I see people commuting in these things everyday, and these vehicles probably have the same if not worse protection than a Kei car, the older car could be even worse if rust has comprimised the strength of the cars body.


My roadblock, from a manufacturers standpoint is, how much less expensive could you make and sell a Kei car for in the US? From the small = cheaper mindset, a Kei would have to be considerably less expensive than say, an Aveo or a Cobalt to attract enough buyers to make it worthwile, thats my main problem with the Smart, the engineering might be "brilliant", but the car costs "real" 4 seat compact car money, and it only offers a 2yea/ 24,000 mile warranty, (way to stand behind the product). To me, something like the Smart should sell for 6000 to 8000 dollars max.


From my own personal standpoint, I am for less rules and restrictions on automobiles not more, but some of the proposals being thrown back and forth here complain about goverment intervention in what consumers can buy and drive and in the same sentence call for the goverment to make special "rules" for Kei car drivers. It's up to the manufacturer, if there was a way to sell really really small cars in the one of the largest markets in the world, Kei car manufacturers would have already found a way to do it, but I imagine that when you really look at the cost perspective of selling such a vehicle here and the limited returns that it will bring, many are probably not interested in taking a chance.


Does anyone know what a Kei car would sell for in the US?

For example in a straight Yen to $$$ conversion, what would some of the more popular Kei cars list for? (and remember thats before import duties and etc)