Review: 2009 Smart ForTwo - Undone by a Dud of a Tranny
by Sebastian Blanco on Jul 3rd 2009 at 11:55AM 
2009 Smart ForTwo – Click above for high-res image gallery
The Smart ForTwo isn't for shy people. Even though Smart USA has sold about 30,000 of these tiny two-seaters in the U.S., the little rollerskate attracts a lot of attention. On the road or in a parking lot, the ForTwo is a conversation piece, and people will come up and talk to you. Some will tell you about the Smart they saw in Europe. Others will ask if it has the guts to make it onto the highway. Most will assume it gets great gas mileage (it doesn't). But one thing's for certain, during our week with the ForTwo, there was a 100-percent conversation rate wherever we went. Anthropophobes, be warned.
Follow the jump to see what it's like to spend wheel time with a Smart ForTwo Cabriolet.
Gallery: Review: 2009 Smart ForTwo
Photos Copyright ©2009 Sebastian Blanco / Weblogs, Inc.
Among the myriad of questions we received, the most common was how safe it is. That's a fair question, considering the bigger-is-better message we've heard for years. But when you're in the Smart, you don't question its safety, you just drive. Granted, there's a slight feeling of vulnerability on the road – particularly when caught in the wind wake of semis – but the ForTwo feels as solid as anything else on the road the majority of the time. It's only when you stop and think about the tiny box you're cruising in that things get worrisome.
Still, the ForTwo has a full compliment of airbags and other active and passive safety features, and the NHTSA gave the ForTwo a four-star crash rating for the driver (three stars for the passenger), so it's hardly a death trap. Instead, it's a fun but flawed little ride, neither at home in the city nor on the highway.
It's easy (and maybe justifiable) to criticize the ForTwo. "It's only half a car," one friend joked, and the love-it-or-hate-it styling is the most obvious hurdle to ownership. But after driving the Smart ForTwo Passion cabrio in a variety of environments, the fog of novelty wears off and the truth is revealed: there's no ideal environment for this ultracompact runabout.
If you're a commuter in an urban area and only plan to use the ForTwo as a means to get to and from work, you could make a case for the Smart. The good news is that the ForTwo could serve as a road-trip machine in a pinch. And yes, its eight cu.-ft. of cargo space (12 if you fill it to the roof) is enough for a light grocery run – just don't put your ice cream at the bottom of the bags because the ForTwo's perfectly adequate 70-hp, 1.0-liter turbocharged three-cylinder sits between the rear wheels and quickly heats up the rear cargo area for insta-milkshakes. But as an everyday vehicle, the Smart ForTwo fails to stack-up. And it begins with the transmission.
Although the ForTwo's automated manual gearbox has been "improved" from the 2008 model, it's still an unforgivable mess. There are two shifting options: a full automatic mode and a manual option that allows the driver to use either the steering wheel-mounted paddles or the floor-mounted shifter to change gears sans clutch. In automatic mode, the changes are inexcusably jerky, especially between first and second. Using the paddles allows for a slightly smoother shift by manipulating the throttle, but the manual shifting doesn't feel particularly useful as it only allows you to choose when the hiccups happen and does little to alleviate the (neck) pain.
As you'd expect, this puts a serious chink in the ForTwo's urban armor. While it's size is great for parking and the little car zips in and out of traffic with ease, in city driving, where the transmission is most active, the constant shifting makes low- to mid-speed maneuvers a torturous affair. While it might be possible to learn to live with the lurches, our week with the ForTwo wasn't enough – and we doubt any amount of time could dull the discomfort.
After answering the most common queries (What is it? Who makes it? Is it electric?), the next inevitable and justifiable question is about fuel economy. Again, the ForTwo has a surprisingly hard time justifying itself here. We averaged 35.7 mpg during our week with the car, just under the EPA's official 36 mpg combined rating. Initially, we left shifting duties to the ForTwo's computer-controlled tranny, resulting in a 32.7 mpg average. When we decided to stick the Smart Cab into the manual mode and use the paddle shifters, we managed 38.8 mpg. Maybe they're not so useless after all?
From the driver's seat, the ForTwo does its best imitation of a sleek, modern desk. The top of the dash is expansive, and the designers completely nailed a chic, Euro-feel with the colors and layout. Virtually unchanged since the 2008 model, the gauges are stylish yet easy to read. The mid-mounted tachometer is a necessity in manual mode, since it's difficult to hear the engine crying for a change if the radio is on. The tachometer works better than the built-in indicator that flashes an "up" or "down" arrow below the speedometer when it's time to shift, as the LCD indicator is the same color and shape as the gear display and blends in. A separate colored icon, similar to what's found in modern VWs, would have been a better choice.
Other usability issues? While the visors provide an acceptable amount of shading through the windshield, they're practically useless when the glare comes in at anything beyond 11 and one o'clock. Rear visibility provided by the inside mirror isn't great, but works – except when the top is down. Two buttons by the shifter allow you to automatically fit or retract the Passion Cabriolet's top at any speed, eliminating any feeling of separation between the occupant and the environment. But when your enjoying the open-air experience, it's best to perform multiple checks when backing up or doing a lane change as visibility becomes a finite resource. Thankfully, the ForTwo's squat footprint allows you to slide into spaces with a minimum of butt-puckering.
It's also easy to enjoy the passion's standard audio system, which comes with a six-disc changer and an auxiliary jack in hidden in the glove box. The location of the input jack is great when you're on the road as the iPod remains safely tucked away, but it's not so hot when stopping and starting. More than once, we left the player running because we forgot it was in the lockable glove box.
The sticker of our tester came in at $16,990, but the line ranges from $11,990 for the Pure Coupe to $20,990 for the BRABUS Cabriolet. Low sales in 2009 have prompted Smart USA to offer its first ever incentive for buyers, but even with a lower sticker, the ForTwo is difficult for us to recommend. Although some of its drawbacks disappear when you're enjoying the "ForTwo Experience," its abysmal transmission, general lack of utility and fuel economy that comes off as unimpressive for its size doesn't make a compelling case for the ForTwo outside of casual city drivers who value fashion over function, and like to meet new people.
Gallery: Review: 2009 Smart ForTwo
Photos Copyright ©2009 Sebastian Blanco / Weblogs, Inc.
| 2009 Smart ForTwo |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| Performance | |
|
Brakes/Tires/Wheels | |
| Engine | 1.0-liter inline three |
|
Front Brakes | 11-inch ventilated discs (ABS) |
| Configuration/Valvetrain | SOHC, 4 valves per cylinder | |
Rear Brakes | 8-inch drums |
| Max Horsepower @ RPM | 70 hp @ 5,800 RPM | |
Wheels (front) | 15x4.5-inches |
| Max Torque @ RPM | 68 lb-ft @ 4,500 RPM | |
Wheels (rear) | 15x5.5-inches |
| Drive Type | Rear-wheel drive | |
Tires (front) | 155/60 R15 |
| Transmission | Five-speed automated manual | |
Tires (rear) | 175/55 R15 |
| Fuel Injection | EFI | |
|
|
| Compression Ratio | 11.4:1 | |
Exterior Dimensions | |
| Recommended Fuel | 91 octane | |
Length | 106.1 inches |
| Fuel Capacity | 8.7 gallons (incl. 1.3 gal reserve) |
|
Width | 61.4 inches |
| EPA Fuel Economy (city/hwy) | 33/41 | |
Height | 60.7 inches |
| 0-60 mph time (MFR est.) | 12.8 seconds | |
Wheelbase | 73.5 inches |
| Top Speed | 90 mph | |
Curb Weight | 1,808 pounds |
| |
|
|
|
|
| Suspension/Steering | |
|
Interior Dimensions | |
| Front | MacPherson, with anti-roll bar | |
Maximum Seating | 2 |
| Rear | DeDion axle | |
Luggage Capacity | 7.8 cu-ft |
| Steering | Rack-and-pinion | |
Head Room (Front/Rear) | 39.7 / 0 inches |
| Turns Lock-to-Lock | 3.4 | |
Shoulder Room (Front/Rear) | 48 / 0 inches |
| Turning Circle (feet) | 28.7 | |
Leg Room (Front/Rear) | 41.2 / 0 inches |
| |
|
|
|
|
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
contact 1:44PM (7/03/2009)
I would agree with this. I went to my Smart dealer, money in hand, to buy one but after the test drive I passed. I love the car and don't car about the less-than-stellar economy but the transmission makes it unforgivable. There is NO reason this vehicle can't come with a standard manual or a CVT (to maximize performance and economy).
Unacceptable.
Reply
jeffzekas 4:05PM (7/03/2009)
Smart recently released a press comment stating they had "fixed" the transmission with new computer settings... true? Or not? Has anyone driven the "new" Smart with the "improved" transmission software?
contact 12:15AM (7/04/2009)
I drove the "new" smart last week. It was MAYBE better than an 08 model but it is almost un-driveable. For as much engineering work as went into that chassis and engine they sure ignored the transmission.
I kept thinking to myself "surely someone drove this car before signing off on making 50k of them"
roz 4:17PM (7/03/2009)
my friend has one and said the update helped.
personally this seems like an ideal car for a manual, then it would be fun.
Reply
amg 11:27AM (7/08/2009)
I thought the same thing after test driving one but I honestly don't think there is room for manual transmission linkage in this car. A CVT would make more sense but then I wonder if it would take up too much room in the engine compartment. I've never seen an engine compartment like that!
I think Toyota has shown with the iQ that there are ways to make a tiny car with a front-mounted engine and it's probably going to wind up dominating the fortwo if they do release it in the US.
Paul 5:32PM (7/03/2009)
I rented a diesel Smart once in Canada. I think people buy it to be different. It feels very European. Though I agree fully with the comment about the automatic tranny. It is a car more suited to a manual. It is a real European microcar, and since most small European cars in Europe are sold as manuals, I'm surprised it doesn't come with one. Paddle shifters just aren't the same. As always, this model was dumbed down for North America.
Reply
Nikki Bloomfield 5:34PM (7/03/2009)
Interestingly, the gear shift looks different to the ones we have in Europe. The US spec model seems to show a more conventional gear selector, while the European one has a more quirky one.
In terms of economy, you can't fault the Diesel engine for it's economy. But at the end of the day you have to examine what the car is designed for. It's a runabout. It's a car for folks who don't need a full size car but need something. We've just traded in a 2007 Prius in for one as the Prius sat on our driveway costing £500 a month on car payments. The Smart is a cheaper alternative. No-where near as clever, or as gadget-laden, but for a city overrun with too much traffic and no-where to park, it's ideal.
Is it right for the US market? It's hard to say. You don't all have the problems yet that we do with parking and congestion (large metropolitan areas like NYC excluded). In a country where the new BMW Mini seems small it's no wonder the smart feels tiny. I'm not sure I would want to drive the 495 around Washington DC in one...
Reply
jeffzekas 2:23PM (7/08/2009)
Nikki,
It is unfortunate that ALL car companies feel the need to "Americanize" their exports to the USA... good lord! Ford ruined the Escort by "dumbing down" the US version, and don't get me started on the US-built VW Golf! (or was it called "Rabbit" back then?).
In fact, I dread that when (not if) GM and Ford bring their euro small cars to the states, that they will feel the "need" to make these vehicles "more American", nee slower, uglier, with with poor suspension and handling.
Regarding the Smart Fortwo: as a daily driver, to be used for commuting in San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, San Jose, and Los Angeles: I say, yes. For use in Wyoming or Alaska (with the exception of the capitol): the answer would be, no.
Oh, and as an aside, and I have to laugh, when I hear folks say, "The MINI Cooper is so small!"... some of us (older folks) were around in 1959, when the REAL Mini (with Morris 850 motor) was out and about! Now, I will concede, the original Mini (and its competitors, the Fiat 500 and Citroen 2CV) were true, small cars... but calling the new MINI "small"?!! Ha!
And will Americans purchase "small" cars? Just ask any one of the MILLIONS of us Yanks, who bought the original Beetle! (not to mention all the Fiats which were sold here, before the Italians deserted us! Hey Chrysler, bring back Alfa Romeo!).
At one time, back in the groovy 1960's, Los Angeles was FLOODED with tiny Austins, MG's, Triumphs, Abarths, BMW's (remember the tiny BMW 750 sedan?) and Citroens... we Californians LOVE small, stylish, entertaining British and Europeans cars! It's not our fault that those companies deserted America! (which then created a thriving "gray market" for Ferrari, Alfa Romeo, and classic mini coopers)
As my friend, Kevin Costner once said, "Build it, and they will come" (and please, US government, put a two dollar gas tax on petrol, in order to get all those single moms out of their monster SUV's!!!).
Regards, Jeff Zekas, Susanville, California
Kirk Koester 11:18PM (7/03/2009)
I thought about passing on the opportunity to comment here but after giving the matter a little thought I have to say that I sort of....well almost.... kind of agree with some of the points made by the reviewer. However, I disagree sufficiently to warrant adding my 2 cents to this thread. Because my "2 cents" comes with more than 18 months behind the wheel of a 2008 Passion Coupe and five months with a 2009 Brabus Coupe I am somewhat qualified to speak on the Fortwo - perhaps even more so than say someone opining on the subject without ever driving - let alone owning - the Smart Fortwo. Ouch! Did I just say that? Ok, may I am just a little biased. I waited more than 10 years to have the opportunity to buy a Smart so I have had a great fondness for the concept and execution of the Smart for longer than most (in America). I first set in an early production model in London back in 1997, and even then had high hopes of the Smart coming to the US one day.
To the review. To be fair, I don't care for the 2008's "lurch-o-matic tranny" that today - even after the 2.0 upgrade - still exhibits, albeit more rarely, an inability to settle on a gear. Nor do I care for the less than stellar mileage. Other than these two points, I don't have any complaints. Yes, the car rides like a bucking horse at times. And I share the concerns noted by the reviewer regarding wind buffeting and a general uneasiness around large trucks. My Rx for such anxiety is to keep to the back streets and off the Beltway.
The Brabus is an entirely different story - its better suspension, wider and taller wheels and tires and lowered stance make for a solid driving experience. Highly recommended, and the car Penske should have brought in from the start.
The above notwithstanding, after 18 months as a Smart owner (I still have both) I still love the Fortwo. Nevertheless - being totally honest - I would be hard pressed to recommend the Smart to a prospective purchaser where the person intends to use the Smart as the primary (only) vehicle. The obvious caveat here is where the prospective "buyer" lives, works and rarely strays outside of an urban environment. Under that scenario I could easily recommend the Smart. By way of example, Washington DC is an excellent fit. I live in No. VA and commute into Washington daily. While I drive at least one of my Smart cars two to three times per week, I also own a 2007 Toyota Tundra double cab and my wife drives a VW Passat 4motion for the heavy slogging. I like to think that the Smarts keep my carbon footprint in balance.
I will close with this - if you like the idea of a small, somewhat utilitarian automobile give the Smart Fortwo a look. We (Americans) must adopt (really, accept) the idea of a smaller, more fuel efficient form of transportation. Our European friends have many wonderful small automobiles to pick from. Perhaps the Smart Fortwo is not the answer for everyone, but if the American public accepts the idea of a quality, well built, fuel efficient mode of transportation, that is "smaller" we will see more "choices" come to our shores. Now if Penske will hurry the Smart EV along!
My 2 cents.
Reply
nrb 3:16PM (7/06/2009)
"18 months behind the wheel of a 2008 Passion Coupe and five months with a 2009 Brabus Coupe"
Also claiming to own a Tundra and a Passat 4motion
"I like to think that the Smarts keep my carbon footprint in balance."
I get the idea, you know that's not the case. There's nothing green about buying cars in rapid succession.
DP 11:21PM (7/11/2009)
@ Kirk K.
As a fellow (now former) owner of a smart fortwo, I agree with your commentary. I ended up trading my smart for a Prius, but, like you, waited for 10 years for the smart to come here. And I agree that it may not be the best car for some, but at least it can help change attitudes about small cars and we can move to more efficient and sensible vehicles in the years to come, right here in America, even.
Lance Morrison 12:56PM (7/04/2009)
As a relatively new Smart Owner (3,500 Miles in approx 4 Months) - I feel I must rise to the defense of my little commuter car.
First off - the car is exaclty what it is advertised to be - a basic fun little runabout. Is it fast - no (It will handle quite well on the freeway at 70 miles an hour)
Secondly - MIleage - as a cost of the car relative to fuel consumption it has been excellent. I average between 37 and 40 mpg around town. I drive an 09 Passion Coupe and spent less than $20,000
Thirdly - Space - My intentions were for a reasonably priced second car - not a moving van. I suspect that those of you with large SUV's fill those to capacity every time you leave your home dock (I mean driveway)
Safety - Between the all the Safety System - I feel more than safe - especially when I also have probably the best safety feature in use as well - The Gray Matter in my head
The Transmission - I agree in zipping in and out traffic the "auto mode" is not comfortable., I use the auto mode in basic stop and go traffic. The key in manual mode to maximize ride smoothness is to listen to and feel the car and watch the tach. I suspect that the folks who never really learned to drive a stick have the most difficulty with this.
Bottom Line - the car is what it is a:
A reasonable priced - fun little safe second car. Yes I get a lot of comments - even some stupid ones like where's the wind-up key / how many clowns can you fit / Is it Gas or Electric (While I am pumping gas at the pump) / YOU FREAKIN HIPPY and so it goes
I guess I could drive a little Yaris / Versa / Aveo etc - spend more money - not be as safe but make you feel better transmission wise?
Reply
David Rushton 8:56AM (7/05/2009)
I have to agree with the criticism about fuel consumption - and your comments reinforce that for me. I have a 2006 Honda Civic. Best car I have ever driven. We paid right at $17,000 for a well equiped model (electric windows, automatic, electric mirrors etc.) I normally get around 35 mpg in town, and over 40 on the hightway - for a full size - high quality car - with a big trunk, and plenty of room for 4. I would jump at a smart car - If it got 60 mpg - it seems to me that if honda can wring 40 mpg out of a civic - with the size and performance that the civic gets - Smart are just not trying in terms of mileage.
bob kaler 12:17AM (7/07/2009)
thank you for this completely accurate analysis of the smart for two. I ordered one in 2008 and dropped that option after my first test drive. the car lurched and jerked around like a 1955 desoto . the sales rep. kept saying I would get used to it, why? When I requested my deposit back I told them about the primitive transmission but they were not concerned. I purchased a toyota prius.
Reply
Wes 9:58AM (7/06/2009)
I test drove the pre-update car and found the transmission to be perfectly fine. The issue is that you can't pretend it's an automatic transmission. It's a manual transmission with some robotic goodies to make it easier to use. If you use manual mode and keep telling yourself you're driving a real manual transmission car, using the proper behavior of lifting off the throttle for each shift (gear change) makes it work as smoothly as an experienced driver can muster with a true manual transmission. For the first few blocks I actually worked an imaginary clutch pedal with my left foot to get my brain into the right mood!
Now if you don't know how to drive a manual transmission car, the Smart will still get you from point A to point B, but yes, it's going to be a herky-jerky war the whole way. At least you won't stall at every stop!
In automatic mode, you need to lift off the throttle for each shift, and the only way to get in coordination with the computer at that point is for you to tell it when you want it to shift by lifting off the throttle each time. At which point you might as well use manual mode! One way or another, it's a car that wants you to tell it when to shift- it can't do it well in either mode if you're going to keep your foot pinned to the floor and not give it a chance for it to change gear on its terms. Some find this inexcusable, but find it perfectly normal that you're expected to lift for each gear change in a real manual transmission car. Just like the rest of the Smart, it's a perfectly evolved runabout for European drivers crowded European cities, which means it's mostly out of sync with American drivers and American needs. We ended up not buying it because we're not quite urban enough for it to be the right size- got a Mini instead- but as folks that do know how to drive a real stick shift car, found the Smart's automated manual to be a non-issue.
Reply
Bernd 4:31PM (7/08/2009)
Excelent review of the car.
And not surprising at all, if you remember what the concept is about.
This car is supposed to be used in crowded and narrow towns mainly, long distance travels were obviously not top of the priority list, as was fuel consumption outside the city.
The first generation smart could be parked "nose in". Try this car in Rome or Athens and you get the point (and start to question even more, why it is sold in the US).
From an aerodynamic point of view the car is not small, just short. The frontal area is about the same as a Civic or so, and the shortness makes it even harder to get a good cD.
To make things worse, the shortness requires a very rigid structure for competitive crash performance, which makes the car relatively heavy.
The gearbox performance is still weak, it has been even worse in the first generation models.
This encouraged crowds of "chip tuners" offering software updates for the engine and gearbox electronics, improving this. Some of those softwares were so agressive, that you were able to burn the clutch within days. As you would expect, smart did step to the safe side.
The body structure does indeed hardly allow a conection between the shifter knob and the gearbox, so there is no conventional manual gearbox possible.
The diesel version (not available in the US) will do about 70 MPG by the way.
Greetings from germany, used to the smart for 10+ years.....
Reply
David Cook 12:11PM (7/13/2009)
I have a 2009 4-cyl Malibu that gets 39 mpg on the highway with nary a lurch. Is the
Smart a car for the maid to drive to make the owner feel "greener"? Would it have
sold if they had called it "Dumb4-2? I think it was a car designed by a comittee of
AlGore wannabees who forgot that cars with small engines need manual transmissions. Americans will need to be completely re-indoctrinated before they will
poke around in cars like the Smart. From what I have seen lately, they just want to
slip it in gear and get back to texting or sexting or Twitting(we seem to be uniquely
qualified for the concept containing the word "twit"). The mind boggles at the idea
of a Smart in traffic with a bevy of Kenworths, Peterbilts and Macks. A plethora of
airbags will avail you little when smushed between the bumpers , (get out the tape
measure) of a oair of semis.
Fahrvergnugen!
Reply
Nick A. 3:28PM (7/13/2009)
I like the interior!
Reply
Gilbert 3:41AM (7/18/2009)
This is precisely the problem I had during my first test drive. When I commented to the salesperson about how awful the transmission was, he said it merely took getting used to and that I needed to feel the appropriate time to roll off the throttle (for some reason when referring to Smarts, I use motorcycle-speak), let the transmission do its thing, and gently press on.
At this point, I pulled over and asked him to show me. Right there on Lankershim Blvd., he got out, finagled his way into the seat (they really should hire smaller people at Smart), and proceeded to demonstrate what I already knew: there is no getting used to that inexcusable junk of a transmission. The car lurched and shimmied just the same, and the salesperson knew it. He also knew there was no chance he was getting my deposit.
It's a shame, really. That transmission alone -- a greater slap in the face considering the amount of "real" car I could get for the same price -- cost Smart a sale. Clearly, I am not alone. More importantly, I look forward to a change ASAP.
Reply
Stephen Gatlin, Ph.D. 12:00PM (7/28/2009)
I'm entirely used to liking and buying and enjoying cars that the so-called pros don't like. I shall eagerly buy a FIAT when they come to the US, which I hope is soon. I'm tired of all cars being regarded as crap because they're not one of the chosen few. If you take official advise, one should drive nothing but a Japanese car. Well...I don't like them. I think they're globally boring. And I won't buy one. A German car? Not really reliable and really expensive.
I have a SMART passion that I commute with. It works fine. The transmission (always on automatic) does not bother me. I have spent NO money to maintain it (a service every year or 10,000 miles). Driven carefully, the car get 35-38 MPG in suburban driving. And I don't feel unsafe in it. I don't feel cramped. It zips about with ease, even aplomb. So, dear reviewer, take your 10, 000 pound SUV or whatever it is you drive and ------ it.
Reply