The 5th Gear SMART crash video
The hubbub surrounding the release of the redesigned Smart ForTwo has included the to-be-expected jokes about the car's tiny size, concerns about its perceived safety, and no small number of vocal defenders in the comment threads of our Smart posts. The pro-Smart crowd has touted the ForTwo's fuel economy and pointed out that the car's built-in safety cell has performed well in European crash tests. A few commenters pointed us in the direction of the Fifth Gear clip you see above.
In it, you'll see one of the official Mercedes-produced videos showing a Smart colliding with a larger MB sedan and looking pretty good afterward (though if you put a gun to our heads, we'd likely pick the Benz as the ride to be seated in for that scenario). That's just part of the vid's setup, however, as the main portion features Tiff Needlell showing us what happens when a remote-controlled Smart smashes into a concrete barrier at highway speed. It's pretty ugly to watch, though it's a fantastic demonstration of the minicar's ability to survive such a crash. Tiff even opens and closes the door afterward, which still latches properly.
Impressive? No doubt.
But the crash was so violent, and the deceleration so sudden, we shudder to think of what would have happened if the car had real passengers inside. In the end, it only serves as a reminder that no matter what car you're in and how safe it's been designed to be, you really don't want to be in any crash -- ever -- because real life isn't some controlled test.
[Source: YouTube]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Tiago do Vale 5:01PM (11/10/2006)
Is there any special reason for you guys to post old material? It has become a trend, and generally it's not what the readers seek in a blog, updated many times a day: the readers seek fresh news...
Please: I don't want to offend: I just wanted to ask, make the observation, and offer the comment as a sugestion...
Reply
rob 5:07PM (11/10/2006)
Even if the Smart's passenger cell was made with the ever elusive 'adamantium', an industructible alloy, it would still not be that safe. Stiffness is NOT what you want in accident... the very reason most SUVs aren't safe in accidents is because of their stiff frames. In order for a car to be 'safe' in an accident it must crumple to disperse energy, sacrificing the car to save the people. The smart car is extremely stiff, meaning that all the energy in an accident will be transferred directly to the passengers. Think of it this way: It's about as safe as a billet titanium elevator falling down a skyscraper. But hey, as long as the elevator survives, that sudden stop won't hurt you at all, right? Sure. Whatever man. I wouldn't get one of these things with all the fucking SUVs driven by total morons on the roads. All it takes is one stupid bitch in an escalade yapping on her cell phone to kill you or your loved one.
Reply
Jro 5:11PM (11/10/2006)
i couldn't help but enjoy this video! where can i sign up to get paid to crash cars via remote control into a concrete barrier.
i was very impressed with how the structure held up on the smart. it would have been more useful, possibly, doing an offset crash at 45 mph like the NHTSB does.
Reply
curtis 5:19PM (11/10/2006)
It's a cool car, and it will succeed in city conditions, however highway and interstate driving will not be this cars crown. No car is meant to be crashed, so as long as people don't crash in these things there will be nothing to complain about. I would never buy one, I have a motorcycle, and I really don't ever feel safe on the Highway just because I know that if something goes wrong and I lose control for any reason I'm most likely dead. I prefer driving a car, I don't think I'd feel safe on the highway in a Smart. I need something more responsive, more powerful, and that won't chop my legs off in the case of a frontal accident.
Reply
curtis 5:19PM (11/10/2006)
#3, they aren't trying to determine an average in and around city accident, they are trying to demonstrate highway speed accidents. I think the point is that the passengers are not as likely to survive in a higher speed accident.
Reply
CJ 5:27PM (11/10/2006)
I think the arguments about the Smart's size and safety are moot. It's proven safe by testers at reasonable speeds. And the people that say they wouldn't ride in it because of all the large SUV's and Semis on the roads and freeways, saying it ridiculous to have something so small on American roads, obviously aren't motorbike/moped riders either.
Reply
CJ 5:28PM (11/10/2006)
#1 - They are posting it as a reference to the new Smart being unveiled and the expected torrent of "it's not safe" comments.
Reply
Jon 5:29PM (11/10/2006)
If you look closely it appears that although the "windsheild stays intact" ,the oncoming E-class has entered the passenger footwell area severing the legs of a potential driver(perhaps thats why there's no crash-test dummy).
Reply
rob 5:31PM (11/10/2006)
But.... this isn't a moped, it's a car.
Reply
Gil 5:35PM (11/10/2006)
#2: Gee you're smarter than a whole R&D team of Mercedes aren't you? It's called a rollcage... look it up.
And did you even watch the video? The tests are pretty conclusive. The test dummies record all the data on the severity of the crash and the car got good ratings
Reply
CJ 11:44PM (11/10/2006)
rob - so? If the NHSTA lets it through and you aren't the one driving one of the little buggers, what do you have to worry about. Let consumers decide if they belong here or not.
Reply
Jon 5:42PM (11/10/2006)
I don't want to get my legs severed or mashed into jello in an ordinary fender bender.The case for this car's safety is for very gullible people.
Reply
James 5:52PM (11/10/2006)
This is a rather old video, but it does show how many of the smaller new cars are being developed to withstand major crashes. Now they just need to find a way to allow the humans inside to survive the sudden stop.
James
Reply
thesawzall 6:15PM (11/10/2006)
SMART ought to make a bumper system that extends when an impending crash is imminent. That way you could provide a decent sized "crush zone" without needing a larger car.
Reply
iQuack 6:27PM (11/10/2006)
"Sure. Whatever man. I wouldn't get one of these things with all the fucking SUVs driven by total morons on the roads. All it takes is one stupid bitch in an escalade yapping on her cell phone to kill you or your loved one."
---------------------------------------
I agree! I'd rather own a smaller car but replaced a compact sedan with a mid-sized sedan because the bigger car is more protective.
True that small cars are safer than ever before, but to make any small car as safe as a larger and heavier car--ALL ELSE EQUAL--you'd have to repeal the laws of physics.
Reply
chewy 6:42PM (11/10/2006)
Pasagners is ALL vehicles would have died in a 70 mile collision. Even the biggest one that you can imagine. That of course includes SUVs as well.
Reply
rob 6:48PM (11/10/2006)
Chewy, your spelling ability undermines any credibility you would have otherwise... hwich isn't much, considering that dude from top gear crashed at over 200mph and lived.
Reply
rob 7:44PM (11/10/2006)
And now I realize some jackass is going to point out that 'hwich' isn't spelled right.. it's just a typo.
Reply
dakota 7:09PM (11/10/2006)
" considering that dude from top gear crashed at over 200mph and lived."
He didn't crash into a wall at 200 MPH did he? Dale Earnhart crashed into a wall head on (at a much lower speed) with safety gear on and didn't survive.
Reply
Tiago do Vale 8:26PM (11/10/2006)
The comparision with the Corsa isn't quite fair... They should have used an A class car, like the Renault Twingo, or the FIAT Cinquecento...
Reply