wrote:
> In alt.autos.ford FanJet > wrote:
>> wrote:
>
>>> High mileage conventional cars have been here before. My daughter
>>> has a Chevy Metro, 3 cyl, 1100 cc, 5 speed. She gets 40+mpg
>>> overall, but my Civic Hybrid has more power, more space, A/C, Power
>>> Steering and Automatic.
>
>> The smart car is entirely different. At least the Canadian model. It
>> has very smart ABS, A/C, a decent heater and all the other things
>> North American users might want. Certainly not a Metro and, if
>> you're hauling 2 people, much better and cheaper than a Civic
>> hybrid. BTW, there are plenty of Metros around with PS, A/C and
>> automatic transmissions.
>
> A Metro with A/C, P/S, and automatic transmission is not going to get
> anywhere near the same mileage. For 1998, the 5 speed is 44/49, the
> automatic is 30/34. No mention of A/C.

The real Metro problem is that it, unlike your Honda, was designed to be
cheap not fuel efficient.

> Granted, the smart car might be a nicer car than the Metro, and that
> remains to be seen, but it is smaller still. Why is there no high
> mileage Mini, instead of a Cooper-S model?

That's like asking why there isn't a high mileage Miata. The Mini isn't
designed to be economical. It's designed to be a two seat, fun to drive,
convertible roadster. For me, they didn't succeed. Others seem to like it.

> You think a Smartcar will be better than a Honda Civic Hybrid for
> hauling two people? By some definitions, maybe, but I can't believe
> it will be better overall. What about a Honda Insight? Higher
> mileage, two passengers.

To each... but I'd be willing to purchase a Smart Car if I could.

> What is the smartcar mileage with two people? My Civic remains
> unchanged with one or two people, and I'm not sure I notice with
> three.
> Passenger miles per gallon might be important.

True and I haven't seen any figures like this for SC. OTH, your Civic
obviously uses more fuel as the load increases.