Automotive turkeys 2008

The word “turkey” means different things to different people. Thanksgiving, for many, is a great time for turkey…unless you’re a turkey. For those of us who drive different cars every day, we sometimes come across features that rank as turkeys – perhaps the designers/engineers created them with the best of intentions, but in the real world, they prove frustrating. We’ve already written enough about BMW’s iDrive, perhaps the biggest automotive turkey of all time. Some turkeys are nice ideas that simply fall short.

In an informal poll in and around the Consumer Reports Auto Test Center, I’ve come up with some other turkeys that particularly rankle our feathers:

•    Sirius radio reception in wooded, tree shade areas is awful. Also, some car audio systems have a long delay, making you wait to see the title of the satellite radio station identification.

•    Automatic door locks that don’t unlock when you park or allow a choice to set the locks to unlock when the car is turned off. This maybe a good feature for those who want the security in a tough neighborhood, but consumers should at least be given the choice. (This turkey was mentioned more than once.)

•    The government giving a tax credit if you buy a 19-mpg Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid but nothing if you buy a 32-mpg Toyota Corolla or 29 mpg Ford Focus.

·    Outside mirrors that automatically turn and give you a view of the ground below when shifting to reverse. While this offers a good view of the curb, it makes using the mirrors to back out of a long driveway useless. Convex or larger mirrors do it all.

•    Chrysler announcing its hybrid Aspen and Dodge Durango SUVs and then unceremoniously killing them four weeks later.

·    Mini Cooper’s radio controls (see photo above), which are scattered all around the center stack. The radio’s volume knob, for example, is mounted separate from the radio head unit, lower on the dashboard. It’s easy to grab the radio’s other knob by mistake; even though that’s a multi-function knob, it only serves as a tuning knob if you push the “m” button first. (Of course!) It also takes several button presses to change radio modes.

·    Re-inventing a wheel that wasn’t broken in the first place. For example: Some keyless ignitions work OK, but some “Start” buttons are hard to find and require a push-and-hold process to start the car. The worst are those on BMWs and Mini Coopers that require using a fob placed in a slot and then pressing a start button. What was wrong with a key?

·    Big key fobs are maybe OK if you use a purse, but they’re bulky in a pant’s pocket. Kneel down at just the wrong angle, and the panic button can be activated, resulting in the car’s horn going off and waking up the neighborhood.

•    Acura’s styling department is a whole, gobbling turkey within itself. Have you seen the beaks on the TL, TSX and RL? I can’t tell them apart. They all look like grinning teenagers with mouths full of braces.

•    The headlights in the Toyota Prius Touring. On a scale of 1-5 (with 5 being the tops), these lights got a 1. Even with Xenon bulbs, low-beam light doesn’t provide enough illumination forward to allow the driver time to see and react to objects in the road. The lights also have a distinct ramp-shaped cutoff between light and darkness at the top of the low-beam pattern. These lights leave us in the dark.

•    Paying a premium to buy a Smart (ours was just under $16,000) to get 39 mpg overall but putting up with the limitations of being able to seat only two people, limited cargo room, and maybe the worst transmission ever, when--for about the same a price--you could get a Honda Fit or Toyota Yaris, which seat five, and are infinitely more comfortable and (in the Fit’s case) fun to drive.

Anyway, that’s our short list. I’m sure we could go on, but you get the point. What particular car controls, models, or manufacturers drive you bonkers? Pass the gravy, and share your automotive turkeys in the Comments below.

--Mike Quincy

2008 SEMA - Smart meets John Deere?

One of the first thoughts I had when we bought our Smart was how it compared to my John Deere x300 lawn tractor. Both fit in my garage easily. Both are pretty slow and noisy on the road. Both are easy to park. And both have headlights and a cupholder.

But someone has taken the comparison much, much more literally. Black Deere Automotive LLC is showing the "Urban Tractor" here at SEMA, a John Deere green, bright-yellow-wheeled Smart Fortwo Passion cabriolet. According to the informational sheet next to the car, their philosophy is "going green doesn’t mean you have to give up being cool." Along with the eye-catching paint job and little model tractor on the radio antenna, they added four air horns, an air-compressor powered auxiliary truck horn, and a big stereo.

Personally, I’m waiting for the 72-inch wide mowing deck and plow. You see, my x300 doesn’t have air conditioning or heated seats.

—Tom Mutchler

Read about more cars, gear, news, and views from SEMA. Watch our Smart ForTwo video review.

First Drives of the latest vehicles to enter our test program

At Consumer Reports, we are constantly buying new vehicles to put through our exhaustive test program consisting of more than 50 tests. As vehicles start the evaluation process, we share our initial, raw impressions through the "Logbook" posts to the Cars blog. When vehicles are deeper into their test regimen, we provide First Drive reports on popular models on their way to a complete road test.

The most recent First Drives include the Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid, Honda Pilot, Nissan Murano, Smart ForTwo, Volkswagen Tiguan, and Volvo C30. The full tests of all these vehicles will be published in the months to come.

Down the road, the Acura TSX and Ford Flex are likely candidates for First Drives.

The latest First Drives:

2009 Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid: The Tahoe Hybrid improves on gas mileage over the traditional Tahoe, but the increase in cost may not add up in the fuel savings. Read the complete First Drive.

2009 Honda Pilot: The redesigned Honda Pilot stays close to the original version, but toughens its appearance with an aggressive grille and slab sides. Read the complete First Drive.

2009 Nissan Murano: The redesigned Murano midsized SUV brings improvements such as an upgraded interior and more competitive price. It receives decent fuel economy, but it requires premium fuel. Read the complete First Drive.

2009 Smart ForTwo: The ForTwo minicar combines flashy styling and clever packaging, but it disappoints with dynamics and overall value. Gas mileage is good, but premium fuel eats up the savings. Read the complete First Drive.

2009 Volkswagen Tiguan: Volkswagen’s first small SUV is well crafted with a roomy interior, comfortable ride, and smooth powertrain, but buyers may be in for sticker shock. Read the complete First Drive.

2009 Volvo C30: This sporty small hatchback is very stylish and aims to compete with the Mini Cooper and Volkswagen GTI. However, its competitors are more entertaining and give you more for the money. Read the complete First Drive.

Every month, we add new First Drives to ConsumerReports.org. These can be found on our First Drives hub linked on the main Cars page and secondary New Cars page. First looks can also be found in the model overview pages (available to online subscribers) until they are replaced with a final road test.

We’re interested in knowing what new models you would most like to see covered in a future First Drive. Post your suggestions in the Comments below.

—Liza Barth

The Smart and I

After commuting in the Smart ForTwo a few times, I couldn’t help contemplating how little the world of automobiles has advanced over the last fifty years.

My motorized career began in the early 1960s, with a 1957 BMW Isetta 300. At the time, my parents couldn’t afford much more than the second-hand post-war bubble-car. At least it was a major upgrade over the Lambretta scooter my father owned before he got married. I was placed on the package shelf – baked from below by the single-cylinder, 298 cc engine, and broiled from above by the scorching Israeli sun through the rear window. Perhaps that explains how my love of cars was seared into me at an early age. Infant carrier? Forget it. Seat belts? Not a chance. Air-conditioning? Only by opening the fabric top. Clearly, today this would amount to child abuse; back then it was hip.

You might think it’s off the wall, but actually it’s not so crazy to compare the Smart with the Isetta. Both are two-seat micro cars with a rear engine. One had a BMW badge on its front-swinging door; the other is marketed by Mercedes-Benz. The Smart has a three-cylinder engine and—with some patience—exceeds 90 mph; the Isetta could barely bump 50 mph with a stiff Mediterranean tailwind. But I bet even now, the Isetta would draw at least as much curiosity on the street as the Smart. Granted, the Smart has a lot more safety equipment. (Score an extra point for the Smart.)

The 2009 Smart ForTwo we’re testing makes you feel vulnerable with its lethargic take-off. The bone-jarring ride is fatiguing. And, at every up shift, the automated manual transmission creates a nauseating heave and pitch. While the 39 mpg overall we attained with it is good, it needs to be put in perspective. The discontinued Toyota Echo four-door sedan we tested in 2000 got 38 mpg overall (with a manual transmission). The Volkswagen Golf diesel we tested back then got 41 mpg. Both cars were practical five-seaters that drive much more “normally” than the puny Smart.

Since the Smart becomes such an instant conversation piece. It’s kind of like walking your new puppy... Here’s a sample of the most common questions I've been asked about the Smart:
“Is it electric?”
“Is it a hybrid”
“Does it get, like, 80 mpg?”

Granted, 80 mpg would be nice (and maybe even make up for all the compromises this car requires), but even a decent scooter doesn’t do that. According to Vespa, its GTS 250 model gets 65-70 mpg under laboratory conditions. In other words, even with today’s technology, we have to settle for a dinky, $15,000 two-seater to get 39 mpg, if we don’t choose a more expensive hybrid.

That brings to mind another forgotten car. Remember the Honda Insight? The first hybrid car, offered from 2000 to 2006 in the U.S., sold for $19,000. It was also a two-seater, but accelerated from zero to sixty in a respectable 11.2 seconds (with the manual tranny) and got 51 mpg overall. In my view, settling for a klutzy, limited use two-seater might as well bring dividends in other areas and the Insight did so more than the Smart.

So, looking at the historical evolution of cars, if the Smart marks a half–century’s worth of automotive progress in terms of inexpensive, frugal motoring, it doesn't exactly leapfrog over the Isetta. Overall, it’s not a particularly impressive record for us as a society.

—Gabe Shenhar

Discuss Smart in the Cars forum.

Just In: Smart ForTwo

Sometimes events converge together:
Wednesday: The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) releases crash test results for the Smart ForTwo.
Thursday: We take delivery of our Smart.
Friday: The start of my annual pilgrimage to the Carlisle (Pennsylvania) Import and Replicar Show.

The result: A 1,000-mile road trip in our Smart over a three-day weekend.

It won’t come as a big surprise that a Smart isn’t really an optimum long-distance road trip car. The tiny two-seater is intended as a fashionable urban runabout; it’s a fairly common sight in big cities in Europe where parking is at a premium and low-displacement engines avoid big taxes. But now the second-generation ForTwo is on sale here in the United States, where people drive longer distances and the roads are filled with hulking SUVs.

My wife thought (once again) that I was a bit nuts for taking the Smart on this trip. The aforementioned crash test results helped me feel a bit better; the 1,800-pound Smart did quite well in the IIHS offset- and side-impact tests. Still, watching the crash videos, it was disheartening to see the car bounce dramatically away from the frontal-offset barrier, suggesting a risk for moving into oncoming traffic or tripping off the road. And the IIHS was quite clear in their press release that minicars have the highest relative accident death rate on the road.

Everything is relative. When I stopped to fill up the Smart during a rainy night on I-95 (you do that often with such a puny 8.7-gallon tank), I pulled into the pumps behind two people on a BMW motorcycle. Even though they had full riding safety gear, I felt a bit bad for them—they’re a lot more exposed than I was in my airbag-equipped transportation pod. (Plus I had a roof.) Surprisingly, you don’t feel that vulnerable in the Smart; the high seating position puts you at a decent height relative to other cars and the airy and roomy-enough-for-two cabin doesn’t feel as squished inside as you’d think. Just don’t look over your shoulder.

It’s a disappointment that this tiny car lacks daytime running lights—given its size, you can use all of the help to be seen you can get. And don’t expect slower-moving vehicles to get out of the way when you come up behind them to pass; the Smart doesn’t exactly enforce lane discipline from other drivers.

But once people see you, the Smart is one of the most stared-at cars on the road. Everyone looks at you and lots of people point. Some of them laugh. You wind up waving a lot. Smarts are still rare sights, especially outside of the urban areas where most of the dealers are located.

It wasn’t a surprise that the Smart drew a lot of attention when parked on the show field at Carlisle. Every time I went back to the car, it had drawn a small crowd. (There was a lot more interest in the Smart than there was in the Jaguar XK convertible I drove to the show two years ago.) People basically had the same two questions: What is it and what kind of fuel mileage does it get.

The answer: On our not-yet-broken-in Smart, I observed 40 mpg on the required premium fuel while cruising at highway speeds. With all of 71 horsepower from the tiny 1.0-liter three-cylinder engine, the Smart keeps up in traffic but struggles to maintain speed on highway hills. You’re tempted to manually downshift the slow-shifting automated manual using the paddle shifters. When worked, this gasoline engine sounds a lot like a diesel. Still, this car is a lot quicker than the first-generation Canadian-market Smart turbodiesel we previously tested.

There is something of a debate brewing in the automotive press of whether the Smart ForTwo is fun to drive. As Lawrence Ulrich wrote in his pointed New York Times review, “The Smart has been described as fun to drive by some reviewers, but other than showing taillights to the neighborhood riding mowers, I don’t see it.”

To my way of thinking, the Smart’s fun doesn’t come from doing the normal things that make other cars fun—like super handling or acceleration—but rather that it does normal car stuff at all. Compared to every other car in this market, it seems so wonderfully improbable that this tiny car can haul two people and their luggage while keeping up (and sometimes passing) highway traffic. Plus, just as driving a big SUV can inspire some evil thoughts (Can I clear that curb in the mall parking lot?), the Smart almost begs you to find tiny parking spots or squeeze into little holes in traffic.

But just how well does the Smart do normal car stuff? We’ll let you know as we put more miles on ours.

—Tom Mutchler

Buying a Smart ForTwo

Buying a Smart ForTwo guarantees you a lot of looks. Part of that stems from the Smart’s 106-inch long diminutive size and gawky cuteness. But another reason is its rarity. Since the car only recently went on sale, there aren’t too many of them on the roads.

Hence, it’s not easy to buy a Smart. There are basically two ways to get one. You can get a $99 reservation online from Smart that holds your place in line. Problem is, lots of people are in line ahead of you. Consider that we made our reservation in October, 2007—and the dealer said we’d probably be waiting until next October to get a car. Don’t expect to make any interest on that $99 either. At least Penske, the mega dealer/rental/racing company that imports the car is trying to get more production to ease the demand.

The other way to get a car is to find an "orphan" that someone ordered but didn’t buy. Our dealer had a less cute name for this situation—a "declined" car. That’s how we wound up with our white Passion coupe. Equipped with the Comfort package (heated seats, power steering, paddle shifters, panorama roof) and some trivial options, our car was $15,355. That’s before all of the dealer profit padding we had to buy on the high-demand car (including $695 for Simoniz protection and $895 for LoJack), pushing the price up to nearly $17,000. Although dealers are strongly encouraged—with threat of losing their franchise—to not mark up the cars over MSRP, Smart enthusiast forums report that ours wasn’t the only case of a dealer padding the "orphan’s" price with such add-ons.

You’re probably doing the math by now. Even the MSRP of $15,355 seems like quite a bit of money for such a small car. (Well-equipped, yes, but still really small.) Only $30 more buys a Honda Fit automatic, a much more versatile car. With its $2,000 incentive here in Connecticut, you could get our Top Pick Hyundai Elantra SE with an automatic for $15,945 before haggling, which is much quieter, rides a lot better, and can comfortably seat four.

Of course, no one gives you a second look in a Fit or an Elantra. And the Smart’s EPA estimated fuel economy of 33/41 beats both of those cars. We’ll put more miles on our Smart and go through our full test program. Then we can figure out just where the Smart’s value equation falls in the world of small cars.

—Tom Mutchler

Discuss Smart cars in our forum.

Smart ForTwo crash test results and video

With the Smart ForTwo coming to the United States for the first time, we have heard many questions about this microcar’s safety than its fuel economy. How will its occupants fare in a collision? We now have some definitive answers regarding crash protection from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS); both organizations give the miniscule ForTwo decent marks.

In April, the NHTSA conducted front- and side-crash tests on the redesigned 2008 model, awarding the car four stars for frontal protection for the driver and three for the passenger. In the side crash test, the agency gave it five stars, though flagged a safety concern because the driver door unlatched and opened, creating a risk for occupant ejection.

After viewing the NHTSA test and videos, we were anxious to see how the Smart ForTwo fared in the more stringent IIHS tests. In a report released today, IIHS has given the ForTwo its highest rating of Good in frontal-offset and side-impact tests. As can be seen in the video (search in the Consumer Reports crash test video player), the ForTwo experiences some drama in the tests.

Frontal-offset test
When the Smart strikes the offset barrier, there is precious little structure ahead of the passenger compartment to absorb the crash energy, putting more work on the restraint system. The driver dummy’s head struck the steering wheel through the front air bag, though injury measures were considered Acceptable. The restraints and dummy kinematics were rated Good, matching the overall rating. In watching the video, the ForTwo spins around in what could be an adjacent lane or possibly off the road. Most vehicles do not spin nor move laterally in such a way, raising the possibility of other risks. In the NHTSA test, on the other hand, vehicles are crashed into a flat wall; the ForTwo rebounds expectedly in that test, without rotating or moving sideways.

It is important to note that the IIHS’s frontal-crash-test simulates what would happen if two cars of the same weight and type crashed head-on, left headlight to left headlight. The results can only be compared to other vehicles in the same class. However, there are no other microcars offered in the U.S. by IIHS’s classification. So, while the ForTwo would do well in a frontal impact with another Smart or in a single-car crash, the test results can’t predict how the Smart would fare hitting a larger vehicle. The reality is the Smart will always be the smaller car in a two-vehicle accident.

Side crash test
In the side-impact test, the 3,300-pound IIHS moving barrier pushed the diminutive car quite a distance across the floor of the test center. This test represents the impact from an SUV, and the visual is reminiscent of the Mini Cooper test (check out the video). Again, this could raise the possibility of other risks.

The ForTwo’s stiff side structure and standard side air bags protected the driver, earning the ForTwo a Good rating for side-impact performance. Injury forces recorded on the dummy’s head, neck, torso, pelvis, and left leg were all low. However, the driver door unlatched, as it had in the NHTSA test. As a result, IIHS downgraded the structural rating from Good to Acceptable, however the Institute notes that “the opening didn’t appear to affect dummy movement during the test and injury measures on the driver dummy were low.” Translation: make sure you’re wearing your seatbelt.

The risk of small cars
While the ForTwo performed well overall in the tests by these two organizations, the risk of death is high in crashes of smaller, lighter vehicles. "For vehicles 1-3 years old during 2006," reports IIHS, "minicars experienced 106 driver deaths per million registered vehicles compared with 69 driver deaths in large cars."

The ForTwo is the smallest car offered in the United States, measuring just 106 inches and tipping the scales at a bantam-weight 1,745 pounds. To put it into perspective, our tested Mini Cooper S was 146 inches long and weighed 2,690 pounds. Inquiring about the safety is only natural with the ForTwo.

"All things being equal, in safety, bigger and heavier is always better. But among the smallest cars, the engineers of the Smart did their homework and designed a high level of safety into a very small package," said Institute President Adrian Lund in a released statement. The ForTwo includes seat-mounted side air bags (as opposed to curtain-style, head-protection bags), antilock brakes, and electronic stability control (ESC)—car safety features we recommended you look for in any car. Having ESC in such an inexpensive car is commendable.

There are many small, comparably priced cars to choose from, though admittedly few are as distinctive on the roads, easy to park, or promise such high mileage as the Smart. As with any car purchase, be sure to research all your options to ensure you are making a truly smart decision.

Look for a full road test of the Smart ForTwo in the months to come.

—Jeff Bartlett

View videos of about 250 vehicles evaluated in IIHS crash tests.

For more information on safety, visit our car safety section and read "Crash Test 101."
Discuss Smart cars in the forum.

Personal picks: Economy cars, part 4

In the final installment this month, Consumer Reports writers offer their own views on the budget cars featured in the December 2006 issue.

Jim Travers: There are only two good reasons to buy a Smart ForTwo. One is if you live in a place where parking is tight. The other is if you're lonely. When you drive a ForTwo, everybody wants to talk to you. It helps if you're forlorn enough you don't mind having the same conversation over and over again.

If you have both parking and friends, anything in our December group of subcompacts is a better bet. They all have seating for four, plus room for luggage.  All cost thousands less than the two-seater Smart's almost $22,000 price tag and get mileage close enough to the ForTwo's that you're unlikely to ever make up the difference in fuel savings. Plus, in terms of safety in the land of the giant SUV, it's reassuring to have a little more car around you.

The ForTwo may make sense in Europe, but unless the next-generation model, said to be coming to the United States in 2008 is much more impressive, even its expected $15,000 price won't offset its shortcomings compared against its four-door subcompact rivals.

Of the rest of the group, the Honda Fit gets bonus points for utility with its foldable, versatile interior that allows it to double as a mini-minivan. But what really seals my deal is that the Fit is a hoot to drive, particularly the Sport model with the five-speed manual. A balanced chassis, plenty of grip, and a rev-happy yet economical engine are always a good combination. For me, the Fit is just a Smarter choice.

Mike Quincy: I think the Mazda 3 is the best bet in this category. I realize that adding a few options blows the price out of the water, but this car's combination of fun, finesse and frugality are too good to pass up. The base i Sport model with the manual transmission, ABS/air bag package and A/C comes to around $15,600 before haggling - not a far cry from this group's low of $12,500 (Toyota Yaris) and high of $16,600 (Nissan Versa). I'd rather a Mazda 3 with the 2.3-liter engine, but even the cheapest (an s Sport) would cost almost $18,000 with the side air bags. Perhaps a good used model is the one to buy.

From the logbook: Smart ForTwo

One of my colleagues suggested calling this the "Not-So-Smart Car" and one went so far as to write "Dumb Car" in the logbook. Our First Look of this roller skate on wheels praised its excellent fuel economy (45 mpg average) but also criticized its overall performance, going so far as to call it "the slowest, current production vehicle that Consumer Reports has tested."

Does the Smart need more education? Our engineers take it to school:

"Surprisingly, it doesn't feel dinky when you drive it - but then you get out and laugh."

"The semi-automatic transmission is slow to change and makes the car nod forward and back as it shifts...makes me sea sick."

"Steering is a bit vague and needs constant adjustments on the highway."

"Excellent maneuverability, visibility, access, parking ease, and turning circle."

"The [three-cylinder] diesel engine is OK off the line, but the car is slow and loses speed quickly on hills."

"You have to have a sense of humor about this car."

"Would be OK in a retirement village."

"The transmission's auto mode makes me want to walk home...works better in manual [mode] because you can anticipate the shifts to eliminate the bucking."

"This car is only a fashion statement... for people who don't know better."

"God help me if I hit a deer!"

"Drove it into Hartford--it makes sense in the city, where it keeps up with other cars, zips into holes in traffic, and fits in tiny spots."

"For this money [about $22,000], a Toyota Prius gets similar mpg and is infinitely more practical."

"Gets looks like the Viper--probably better fuel economy, though."

"Everyone smiles when they see this car...like it belongs in the circus."

Keep in mind that this car will be replaced by a new model that DaimlerChrysler will be bringing to the U.S. for 2008. We'll have more on this miniature automobile in the months to come.

--Mike Quincy

The worst road trip cars ever, part 2

Rick Small: “There are a few I dread for a long road trip. The Smart ForTwo is a snoozer on a long  hilly drive, with no power, large trucks looming over you and being blown around by them. This micro car takes forever to get up to speed and has the clunkiest transmission in recent memory. The Pontiac Solstice is cramped, noisy, has no storage, no power, no trunk; but everyone gives you the thumbs up because of its styling. Finally, the Dodge Viper would be a chore – especially on a hot summer’s day in stop and go traffic. And if the A/C breaks you roast inside from exhaust heat. The cabin is also cramped, the ride is bad, and it’s incredibly noisy.”

Mike Quincy: “In 2001, we were testing a group of compact pickups, and the Nissan Frontier was one of them. It had a bone-jarring ride, slow steering, and ungainly handling. The supercharged engine was powerful, but it had a pronounced, unrefined growl and a dominating whine from the supercharger. The front seats were uncomfortable and, to top it off, we only recorded about 14 mpg overall…AND it required premium fuel. Thankfully, the redesigned Frontier is much better.”

We’ll soon cover our personal choices for the best long-distance cars.