Forbes: A Horrifying Glimpse of the Future

[Raza]

Now you're talking!

[MX793]

I don't see how small cars that still get five star crash test ratings in Europe can be considered dangerous.  Some underpowered, yes, but not dangerous.  There are many cars running around on the roads that are larger, but also slower and far less safe.  You can't equate size and safety, not if you want to be taken seriously.  Yes, there is a correlation, but it's not 1.

Not to mention that John's talking about a small car from 35 years ago that accelerates even slower than a car like a Fiat 500 and will likely disintegrate in a crash with a blade of grass.

Car crash tests essentially simulate a car hitting another car of the same mass (by ramming the car into a barrier).  In those conditions, new small cars are very safe.  But in the scenario where a small car meets a larger vehicle like a full sized SUV/pickup, they will not fare nearly as well as a larger (and more importantly, heavier) car.  When two masses collide, the lighter one will experience the greater acceleration and it's the acceleration that causes injuries to the occupants.  When a 2000 lb small car hits a 6000 lb pickup, the small car is going to experience 3 times the acceleration.

[Raza]

I understand that, but I'd like to see a top small car in a crash test (say, a t-bone by a medium size SUV) against an older larger car in the same test.  My bet is that the newer small car will be safer.

[MX793]

I understand that, but I'd like to see a top small car in a crash test (say, a t-bone by a medium size SUV) against an older larger car in the same test.  My bet is that the newer small car will be safer.

The IIHS sort of simulates this scenario with their side impact test.  The ram is shaped like the front of a midsize SUV (similar in height and blunt in shape), but the ram only weighs 3300 lbs, which is about a ton shy of what a midsize SUV really weighs.  This impact would be similar to a 5000 lb SUV hitting you at only 20 mph (by momentum). 

Only two cars in the "minicar" class (Honda Fit and similar) get "Good" ratings from the IIHS in side impact.

[Morris Minor]

If people prefer small cars, why are they cheaper than big cars? Why do they aspire to big cars? Try driving your Fiat 500 1,000 miles on an Interstae in 100 degree weather. See how much you like it then.

Next, the fucker will be mandating which size houses we should live in.

[Raza]

Small cars have aircon, so I don't see that as a problem.  I can get worried by large vehicles in my compact at times, but it's mostly the drivers that are the problem. 

[Eye of the Tiger]

Now you're talking!

I wish they would make a new GTi... or have they somehow done it without my knowing? The Swift needs to come here and compete with the likes of Abarths, Mini S's, and Fiesta SVT's (am I making that up?).

[SVT666]

If people prefer small cars, why are they cheaper than big cars? Why do they aspire to big cars? Try driving your Fiat 500 1,000 miles on an Interstae in 100 degree weather. See how much you like it then.

I didn't know the Fiat 500 wasn't available with A/C.

[2o6]

I can't fuck with these small cars... you guys must not be familiar with the sound of an uncorked 4 banger; it's not sexy

What a crass generalization.

[2o6]

If people prefer small cars, why are they cheaper than big cars? Why do they aspire to big cars? Try driving your Fiat 500 1,000 miles on an Interstae in 100 degree weather. See how much you like it then.

Next, the fucker will be mandating which size houses we should live in.

Aargh!


One: Small cars usually have AC.


Two: A lot of small cars' seats/seating positions and room are more forgiving than many larger cars.

The IIHS sort of simulates this scenario with their side impact test.  The ram is shaped like the front of a midsize SUV (similar in height and blunt in shape), but the ram only weighs 3300 lbs, which is about a ton shy of what a midsize SUV really weighs.  This impact would be similar to a 5000 lb SUV hitting you at only 20 mph (by momentum). 

Only two cars in the "minicar" class (Honda Fit and similar) get "Good" ratings from the IIHS in side impact.

You can't cheat physics. I understand why people don't want cars like these, but I want a car like this.

I wish they would make a new GTi... or have they somehow done it without my knowing? The Swift needs to come here and compete with the likes of Abarths, Mini S's, and Fiesta SVT's (am I making that up?).

Swift Sport.




I really wonder why this and/or the Splash wasn't brought over. I like them 10x more than the SX4.

And I think my ideal small car would be something not on this list:



Renaultsport Twingo 133 Cup.

I'll have it in blue, though.

From what I hear, it's a dour car to drive. (and to look at)

My car goes from 0 to 60 in 12 seconds if I'm lucky, and it suffers from a host of other problems.  So let's suppose it realistically hits 60 in about 14 seconds.

I've now driven it 2,500 miles in the past 3.5 months, and I can truthfully say that I don't think my life has felt threatened due to inadequate acceleration during any of that time.  So excuse me as I stand on my soapbox and call all of you naysayers wrong for saying 10 seconds isn't a good enough target.

The V6 econoline goes from 0-60 in around 14-15 seconds. It's hardly unsafe.

They don't matter in the context that even with gross restrictions, high gas prices, and a terrible economy, the market overwhelmingly chooses not to buy hybrids and subcompacts - with the gloriously worst MPG offenders (Detroit full-size trucks) being at or near the top and all three in the top 10.

IIRC, Fleet Sales also take into account for high volume sales of these large trucks (with the exception of the Accord). As much as I like small cars, you can't use a Yaris to haul wood - thus these cars coming into play.

[ifcar]

Only two cars in the "minicar" class (Honda Fit and similar) get "Good" ratings from the IIHS in side impact.

To be fair, that's two out of just five tested, which isn't too bad. Plus the even smaller ForTwo was Good.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Swift Sport != Swift GTi

[2o6]

Swift Sport != Swift GTi

It doesn't have AWD. SO what?

[Eye of the Tiger]

It doesn't have AWD. SO what?

[the Teuton]

That Renault is quite possibly one of the ugliest new vehicles I've seen in a while.  It looks like a smooshed Renault Spyder with a hatch and then beaten with an ugly stick.

[SVT666]

That Renault is quite possibly one of the ugliest new vehicles I've seen in a while.  It looks like a smooshed Renault Spyder with a hatch and then beaten with an ugly stick.

I don't like the low beltline.

[Eye of the Tiger]

I don't like the low beltline.

Low belt lines can be good



and bad

[Raza]

From what I hear, it's a dour car to drive. (and to look at)

We must be reading different magazines, because Car and Evo both liked it.  And Car runs one in their fleet, and the guy who drives it seems to like it more and more every time he drives it.  Evo gave it four stars (out of five).



Looks good to me.  In that blue with black multispoke/BBS look wheels and the smaller decal pack, it'll be one hot little car. 



Interior's a bit stark, but at this price, it's forgiven for not being a Maybach. 

[Raza]

That Renault is quite possibly one of the ugliest new vehicles I've seen in a while.  It looks like a smooshed Renault Spyder with a hatch and then beaten with an ugly stick.

Yes, but you think the new Subarus are good looking, so your eyes can't be trusted.

[Rupert]

I don't like the low beltline.

I love the low beltline! I'm so sick of high beltline cars.

[SVT666]

I love the low beltline! I'm so sick of high beltline cars.

The was to show sarcasm.  I do prefer high beltlines, but I'm not opposed to this car's low beltline.  I don't particularly like the look of the car anyway.

[Rupert]

The was to show sarcasm.  I do prefer high beltlines, but I'm not opposed to this car's low beltline.  I don't particularly like the look of the car anyway.

Ah, usually I think that the denotes something like a contrary or unpopular opinion... I would have used a more over-the-top smiley there, like  .

[SVT666]

Ah, usually I think that the denotes something like a contrary or unpopular opinion... I would have used a more over-the-top smiley there, like  .

Point taken.  I will do better next time.

[SVT666]

Interior's a bit stark, but at this price, it's forgiven for not being a Maybach. 

The interior is more then just stark.  It's fucking awful.  The centre mounted gauge pod is the first of it's problems.

[2o6]

The interior is more then just stark.  It's fucking awful.  The centre mounted gauge pod is the first of it's problems.

Cheap car, sold in both LHD and RHD markets.

[the Teuton]

Yes, but you think the new Subarus are good looking, so your eyes can't be trusted.

I don't believe you.

[Raza]

The interior is more then just stark.  It's fucking awful.  The centre mounted gauge pod is the first of it's problems.

It's standard kit for a cheaper cars sold in multiple markets.  I don't like it either, but at the price, again, it's forgiven.

[SVT666]

It's standard kit for a cheaper cars sold in multiple markets.  I don't like it either, but at the price, again, it's forgiven.

I can't forgive it, especially when the 500 has a proper gauge cluster.

[2o6]

I can't forgive it, especially when the 500 has a proper gauge cluster.

The 500 isn't cheap.

[SVT666]

The 500 isn't cheap.

What does it go for compared to this thing?