Why Can’t We Have An Ultra Low Cost Cars In The USA?

[RichardJensen]

(And I like how your argument suddenly switched from the Smart ForTwo to the Fiat 500)

that's because, pound for pound, the Smart ForTwo is anything but an "ultra low cost" car.

[Deanh]

Well in Canada there have been smart cars for a few years now. And Dean, they get around 70mpg so no it's no where near a focus. And that's not "I heard from/was told by/etc", that's from the driver of the local CarQuest who delivers parts to this shop. He drives one and owns his own.

 

And yes it is 65-70mpg imperial (4.54L per gal)

 

Regardless, I wouldn't drive one

funny...heres a quote from car and driver....Its short wheelbase (73.5 inches) results in a nerve-jangling ride on neighborhood streets that are raggedy, a place where, oddly, it is supposed to shine as the perfect errand boy. And there’s no overcoming the minuscule cargo space, although if you cram stuff up to the headliner, the room swells to 12 cubic feet, and the passenger seatback folds down flat. Our test vehicle got a disappointing 32 mpg overall, not the 50 or 60 mpg it looks like it should deliver, and the tiny engine requires pricey 91-octane fuel.....................

[Edstock]

Well in Canada there have been smart cars for a few years now. And Dean, they get around 70mpg so no it's no where near a focus. And that's not "I heard from/was told by/etc", that's from the driver of the local CarQuest who delivers parts to this shop. He drives one and owns his own.

 

And yes it is 65-70mpg imperial (4.54L per gal)

 

Regardless, I wouldn't drive one

Uh, the Canuck SMART is a turbo-diesel, though the gas option may be available, I don't know, and I don't care enough to find out. IIRC, the US SMART is gasoline, hence the 91-octane. Canuck diesel emission regs are more accommodating.

 

Do you doubt my findings. Ford cannot build one cheaper and better than the Fiat 500.

You really are an ignorant little yumpum. The FIAT 500 and the new Ka are shared production, built in Poland, IIRC. Anyway, use the link below, read and LEARN. The Ka will have better handling than the 500.

 

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpr...headtohead.html

[Michael Reynolds]

Do you doubt my findings. Ford cannot build one cheaper and better than the Fiat 500.

 

Facts buddy? Facts?

[goinbroke2]

Uh, the Canuck SMART is a turbo-diesel, though the gas option may be available, I don't know, and I don't care enough to find out. IIRC, the US SMART is gasoline, hence the 91-octane. Canuck diesel emission regs are more accommodating.

 

 

You really are an ignorant little yumpum. The FIAT 500 and the new Ka are shared production, built in Poland, IIRC. Anyway, use the link below, read and LEARN. The Ka will have better handling than the 500.

 

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpr...headtohead.html

 

I almost shit when I saw 30mpg, then the "gas"???

 

I didn't know there were gas versions out there. All we have are diesels, I guess that's why the difference huh? LOL!

[J-150]

Fiat's 500 will be selling in the States in 2010 there is a new 80 MPG gasoline hybrid that has 5 star crash protection as standard, l still would prefer to be in something like an SUV in a crash though.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpr...8/fiat_500.html

 

 

 

 

 

the 500 can't be all that bad.

 

Michael Schumacher has one and freely talks about it in interviews.

[BigBadBflo]

Uh, the Canuck SMART is a turbo-diesel, though the gas option may be available, I don't know, and I don't care enough to find out. IIRC, the US SMART is gasoline, hence the 91-octane. Canuck diesel emission regs are more accommodating.

 

 

You really are an ignorant little yumpum. The FIAT 500 and the new Ka are shared production, built in Poland, IIRC. Anyway, use the link below, read and LEARN. The Ka will have better handling than the 500.

 

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/news/autoexpr...headtohead.html

 

 

Priceless....

 

to which car will he jump to next?

[BigBadBflo]

<<double post>>

Edited May 22, 2008 by BigBadBflo

[156n3rd]

Since U.S. auto makers have such trouble building safe and small, America has to be re-educated as to HOW TO DRIVE the cars that will serve their needs. Have you noticed how many people in suv's and pick-ups do not wear seat belts? They are oblious to safety and the law. You want to feel safe in a larger vehicle America? Do the right thing. No speeding, tailgating, lane weaving, drag racing, cell talking or bird flying. We are supposed to be on the same side and we are supposed to respect each other. Yes, I am a middle aged man who has been driving since 1968, legally since 1969. It is hardly ever a pleasure to drive the streets to the store without some idiot acting up. I don't think it matters what anyone drives, it's how well they behave themselves behind the wheel.

[lfeg]

Since U.S. auto makers have such trouble building safe and small, America has to be re-educated as to HOW TO DRIVE the cars that will serve their needs. Have you noticed how many people in suv's and pick-ups do not wear seat belts? They are oblious to safety and the law. You want to feel safe in a larger vehicle America? Do the right thing. No speeding, tailgating, lane weaving, drag racing, cell talking or bird flying. We are supposed to be on the same side and we are supposed to respect each other. Yes, I am a middle aged man who has been driving since 1968, legally since 1969. It is hardly ever a pleasure to drive the streets to the store without some idiot acting up. I don't think it matters what anyone drives, it's how well they behave themselves behind the wheel.

 

Here here. You made the point. Drivers in the US are so distracted by all of the extraneous stuff that they sort of drive on autopilot.

[Roadrunner]

The Smart car is here and meets all the EPA and DOT standards. Of course there is no way Detroit could build a similar car cheaper, no way. I got a 10 page report showing it is impossible so why bother.

 

Base price

starting at $11,590*

http://www.smartusa.com/smart-fortwo-pure.aspx

 

Don't mix the Nano with the Smart. The Smart is no more a ULC than the Aveo.

[LM4EVR]

I had an inexpensive (50 cents) small car in 1964 - a Studebaker Wagonaire - got it at National 5 and 10!

 

It was my first Matchbox.

 

Seriously, what we need is a sensibly sized 4 dr car (something at least the size of a Mercury Sable/Chrysler 300/ Buick Lucerne) that will hold a family of four, would be suitablly sized if produced as a wagon and gets good gas milage. Those small cars are not practical as a primary car and are as scary as all heck to drive (except on a dodgem rink :-) ).

 

Why must we lower our standards - lets get our engineers to work on something realistic. And actually the 1964-66 Studebakers were a quite reasonably sized car now that I think about it.

Edited May 28, 2008 by LM4EVR

[papilgee4evaeva]

I had an inexpensive (50 cents) small car in 1964 - a Studebaker Wagonaire - got it at National 5 and 10!

 

It was my first Matchbox.

 

 

Seriously, what we need is a sensibly sized 4 dr car (something at least the size of a Mercury Sable/Chrysler 300/ Buick Lucerne) that will hold a family of four, would be suitablly sized if produced as a wagon and gets good gas milage. Those small cars are not practical as a primary car and are as scary as all heck to drive (except on a dodgem rink :-) ).

 

Why must we lower our standards - lets get our engineers to work on something realistic. And actually the 1964-66 Studebakers were a quite reasonably sized car now that I think about it.

 

I agree. Y'know, I would have enjoyed seeing the Taurus X re-engineered as just a Taurus Wagon (Estate?).

 

Fusion could hooked it up as well, and just might (maybe?) next generation. At least I can hope.

 

I think the only non-lux/non-entry-lux companies who sell any midsize wagons are Subaru and Volkswagen... someone correct me if I'm wrong. But there's definitely possibility to reopen that market here.

 

I'm looking to get out of my Pathfinder into a car, although I'd miss the cargo space. A wagon would ease my pain right along with the lower gas bill. :yup:

[156n3rd]

To me, my '87 sedan and my '92 wagon were the perfect sized cars. I also love the last generation Maxima because of it's size. The old Vulcan wasn't too shabby on gas. I loved those cars.

[Surgen]

Crazy Idea? Not hardly. Both Nissan and Renault have announced that they are going to have one on the market by 2011 to compete with Tata Motors Nano.

 

Now, if you think that the Nano is nothing more than a glorified golf cart, guess again. The Tata Nano was designed at Institute of Development in Automotive Engineering (I.DE.A) in Italy, a concept and design company that specializes in compact cars. In other words, the Nano is a real car.

 

If I am not mistaken, the lowest cost car in the U.S. is the Chevrolet Aveo, listed at $10,235.

 

So, the big question, especially in the U.S. is why not here? Why not Ford?

 

I can only speculate that everyone is firmly against it. Maybe they think it is ‘un-American’, and believe that it will not sell well, or it will not be profitable.

 

At $4.50 a gallon, small is beautiful and it is intelligent.

 

Maybe Ford will import the Nano to the U.S., then going small will also be very financially sensible.

 

Sorry to revive an old thread... But I just got to read some new 'features' of the Nano:

1) Fixed Seats (No adjustments available)

2) No rear opening - the rear bulkhead is bonded shut - cargo area is accessible by moving the rear seats

3) Since Nano is rear engined, engine must be accessed through rear cabin

4) No Airbags

[NickF1011]

Sorry to revive an old thread... But I just got to read some new 'features' of the Nano:

1) Fixed Seats (No adjustments available)

2) No rear opening - the rear bulkhead is bonded shut - cargo area is accessible by moving the rear seats

3) Since Nano is rear engined, engine must be accessed through rear cabin

4) No Airbags

 

Oh yeah...definitely Ford's saviour vehicle.

[fordmantpw]

Where do you come up with this endless stream of crap?

 

The Nano IS a glorified golf cart, and likely performs in crash tests about as well as one too.

 

And a new golf cart costs more than the $2500 for a Nano!

 

That's without airbags, seat belts, doors, safety glass in the windows (or windows for that matter), etc., etc...

[630land]

Umm, the answer is "because it's a deathtrap"? I'd rather buy a 1999 Escort for $2500!