It is fun to drive with the manual, I thought the automtic did well for such a low power engine. I also liked the interior and the upscale model's stereo. It rode well, handled well, and I thought the assembly quality and quality of interior materials was great for its price. Only negative is that the Aveo before it was not a reliable car. I think much of the Aveo issues were lack of preventive maintenance and neglect from the cars I have seen at dealers and garages.
Why would anyone want a Smart4Two over any car in this class? Smart has to be the most ironic car name ever. Why anyone would pay more for half the car is beyond me.
and everytime you look at it or drive it you see and feel why it is so cheap. The Versa should have been called the Nissan Compromise, or maybe the Nissan Hey at Least it's Not a Bicycle.
had one of this and other then lack of power it was awesome, I could take it places even awd cars couldn't go. it's so light it just climbs everything. if it was a turbo 1.2 with 130 hp and 140 tq it would be a whole lot of fun to drive cause the suspension is tuned perfectly
Have you driven a Smart? They drive like something that rhymes with Hit. Horrible transmission. Awful stability at highway speeds. You'd be an idiot to buy a "Smart" over a Spark, or a Fiesta or anything else for that matter unless you never planned to leave your neighborhood with it.
Most Metros were sold with the 3-cylinder engine. Ever drive one of those? Laughable. Forget using the AC and actually driving. Sure, a 4-cylinder was available, and got about the same MPG as the Spark. Oh, wait...the '97 Metro had no side airbags, no stability control, no ABS, no infotainment system, no heated seats and was generally a deathbox in comparison to the Spark. The Metro rode on 13 inch wheels and tires. Even the 4 banger only made 70hp back in the day vs 84 for the Spark.
lol my Grandmother had a metro; and refused to attempt to head up the one nearby mountain grade with the two of us kids in it due to its inability to handle it with certain chance of survival.
It is fun to drive with the manual, I thought the automtic did well for such a low power engine. I also liked the interior and the upscale model's stereo. It rode well, handled well, and I thought the assembly quality and quality of interior materials was great for its price. Only negative is that the Aveo before it was not a reliable car. I think much of the Aveo issues were lack of preventive maintenance and neglect from the cars I have seen at dealers and garages.
In all honesty, the Smart is overpriced, under featured and not very fun to drive. I would take a Spark or an iQ before the Smart.
Got one just like this and love it
It is larger, but way more expensive, capice?
Why would anyone want a Smart4Two over any car in this class? Smart has to be the most ironic car name ever. Why anyone would pay more for half the car is beyond me.
a 2013 nissan versa is larger, cheaper (i think), and gets better combined gas mileage than this
and everytime you look at it or drive it you see and feel why it is so cheap. The Versa should have been called the Nissan Compromise, or maybe the Nissan Hey at Least it's Not a Bicycle.
I have a charger 2012
had one of this and other then lack of power it was awesome, I could take it places even awd cars couldn't go. it's so light it just climbs everything. if it was a turbo 1.2 with 130 hp and 140 tq it would be a whole lot of fun to drive cause the suspension is tuned perfectly
There were a few things wrong with this review. Like the LS does not come w/ touch screen.
Have you driven a Smart? They drive like something that rhymes with Hit. Horrible transmission. Awful stability at highway speeds. You'd be an idiot to buy a "Smart" over a Spark, or a Fiesta or anything else for that matter unless you never planned to leave your neighborhood with it.
Most Metros were sold with the 3-cylinder engine. Ever drive one of those? Laughable. Forget using the AC and actually driving. Sure, a 4-cylinder was available, and got about the same MPG as the Spark. Oh, wait...the '97 Metro had no side airbags, no stability control, no ABS, no infotainment system, no heated seats and was generally a deathbox in comparison to the Spark. The Metro rode on 13 inch wheels and tires. Even the 4 banger only made 70hp back in the day vs 84 for the Spark.
thats because alot of GM's vehices are designed and build by south korean car companys..
lol my Grandmother had a metro; and refused to attempt to head up the one nearby mountain grade with the two of us kids in it due to its inability to handle it with certain chance of survival.
lol but it still gets better gas mileage