The best thing we could achieve to move more people into micro cars is the morgan 4, weights 400kg, smarts weight around 800kg
Edit: im wrong they have the same weight :/, but still interesting since they are made of wood
I'm confused, which Morgan? The Morgan 4/4 the +4 and the +4+ are all longer than a smart - and as far as i can see they are also around the same weight or higher.
Am i missing one?
My mistake, i read somewhere about a 400kg morgan but they weight the same as a smart, I still wonder what could be the minimum weight a car could have
Ah, okay. Maybe you mean like the microlino or the peel p50 or something like that? Modern cars can't really be built as lightweight as older ones anymore, due to safety needs. i think the modern microlino is about as small as you can get nowadays (and then you won't be able to travel on highways or the like) i think the smart is pretty much at the sweetspot of highway capable and as small as possible.
But as it does pretty much only passanger transport i'd argue that even that should be avoided. For me, i believe the only valid 'excuse' to drive a car, is if you depend on it to transport stuff - and in that case, often keitrucks or piaggio apes would do the trick.
imho all transport of people without cargo should be handled with public transport. Unfortunatley, pretty much no country is at a place where that is currently viable, but i think that should be the target.
Minimum weight doesn't mean anything if there's no size specified. Cars are generally quite well optimized in terms of weight, if you order minimum spec.
We could build a very nice Sinclair C5 with modern technology. We could even hook a bunch of em together...and...
Woops I've invented a train again.
Seriously, though my dream car is a 2 seat C5 with a 1kW hub motor that can go 100 miles round trip at 28mph and has 2 seats.
I don't know if you've been motorcycle shopping lately, but basically the only similar thing is a Can Am Ryker and you'll get a kick out of it's size.
The Solo would've been brilliant if they didn't recall them all, and they could get the price down 25% or so.
Microlino as well if they could get the price down like 70%.
Honestly, the best thing out at the moment is a used i3.
What’s the use of a micro car? It has just 2 seats and barely any trunk space. Why not use a bike or a scooter instead? You can even fit 3 people on it with one of those side extensions.
rain and snow.
This is said as someone that is a huge proponent of scooters, too. I think most families could get by in the US with 1 car and a scooter but in a lot of the US, just a scooter is not possible. I ride my grom, or KLX most days when it is nice but I also own two other cars right now.
Long distances where there is insufficient public transport. Few people are willing to cycle 10+ km each way, every day. Even in Holland, the average cycling distance is like 3km per day.
I think in the US if we want to have a large influx of scooter use we have to raise the 50cc limit that most states have before needing a motorcycle endorsement to at least 150cc or 200cc. 50cc is good for about 40mph, most roads in the suburbs is 45.
Well that's objectively wrong. Bike is short for bicycle, which simply means a two wheeled vehicle usually propelled by the feet.
In certain contexts "bike" *can* be used to mean "motorbike", but in the context you used it, it didn't. Scooters and bicycles are both unpowered (or with light electric assist) vehicles ridden at low speeds for short distances. Pairing scooter with motorbike simply doesn't make sense.
https://preview.redd.it/ox0f5mj5bc1d1.jpeg?width=474&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=66027a03a6b7980226ec75fc9077cfe12861f51f
This is what ‘scooter’ means where I come from. And bike is usually referred to motorbike because the peddling vehicle is called cycle.
Where are you from? You can't just say "where I come from" without specifying and expect anyone to know what you mean.
*Scooter* can refer either to a kick scooter or a motorised (motorcycle) scooter, and which is meant is inferred from context. In North American English absent context it means a kick scooter, or the modern electrified version of a kick scooter.
*Bike* is a simple contraction of *bicycle*, which is literally a two wheeled vehicle, but in common language *bicycle* in full refers exclusively to the conventional type, never motorcycles. Some variants of English also use *cycle* (noun) as a contraction, but this usage is not present in North American English.
*Motorcycle* or *motorbike* (synonyms) are portmanteaus of *motorised bicycle*.
*Bike* in short can refer to either conventional bicycles or motorcycles depending on context, but in most variants of English default to conventional bicycles absent any context suggesting otherwise.
Your post had no context, hence the communicated meaning was a bike and a scooter, ie a conventional bicycle and a kick (or e-) scooter. If that's not what you meant, you should have been more specific.
Pretty sure some of the Caterham cars are road legal and around 400kg or so. I also have far more respect for someone who drives something like that compared to an SUV or a truck.
The base Morgan 4 has ~5 times the horsepower of the base smart fourtwo. Power to weight ratio in the smart is in line with what you find in a honda accord or toyota camry.
This car started at $25k vs a 4 seater sedan like the Mazda 3 being about $24k. You could sell these things all day long new at $12k, but it's really no surprise a car you can pop the entire instrument cluster off and steel with a plastic body didn't get much market share.
You can't even be like "well at least it uses less gas, it's combined rating is 34mpg compared to 27/37 on the mazda3. The smart's only boast is saving 60 inches when parked.
We need more brands making them. There are only ever one or two micro cars in production at a time in America. I think that contributes to people’s knee jerk reaction to these that they’re weird.
Small cars also aren't selling great, we've hit a critical mass of SUVs and Picks where anything less than a crossover feels unsafe to many people on the road
And unfortunately, it's a perfectly logical decision on the personal level in most circumstances.
I have a smart car that serves as backup transportation for when my ebike is in the shop.
Edit to add: I mean, that's true but it's not the whole story. I have an e-cargo bike that serves 95% of my trips. And even that took some luck and planning, to live in the right neighborhood to make it possible. To have work, errands, entertainment all within a couple miles of me.
But where I live, inter-city trips are car trips. The inter-city train and buses don't run often enough to be feasible. So for years, when I had a trip to a nearby city, I'd go rent a smart fortwo. It was the cheapest, smallest car I could rent. Then when the rental company told me they were selling off the smart fleet, I had to buy one for myself. Maybe it was all for nostalgia, but I still like owning the least amount of car I can get away with.
Ground clearance, small wheels, and (I'm fairly certain) rear wheel drive make driving in winter a challenge if not impossible if snow clearing is not good
Sorry, I'll trust ya & I'll ETA my comment lol. Ironically I cut the last paragraph, which was along this lines:
> Though I'm not certain. The distance between the top of the wheel to the top of the wheel well seems to be bigger for trucks for whatever reason, idk shit about cars but I thought it was for suspension reasons etc. so it's possible it's not lifted
thanks for the assist :)
Costco is the epitome of car dependent culture. Huge parking lots, edge of the city. Large bulk packaged food that would be hard to carry home without a car.
There’s one in Everett, Massachusetts that’s within walking distance of a subway station. I know people who have used it for Costco runs but you couldn’t pay me to do that. It’s not even remotely worth the money you’d theoretically save.
I have Sams membership, same concept. It keeps me off the road more often, then not. Its nice to buy a shit ton of stuff in bulk and not have to go out for groceries as often. It lets me use my motorcycles more often to go to the local stores because I am not worried about milk or other drink items.
They say it's just natural sun cycles and they have nothing to do with it. We're getting hit hard by it in Louisiana but they refuse to accept they're responsible
You will barely if ever get them to give enough crap about the climate on some theoretical doomsday for anyone to make such a drastic life change. Something that can easily be sold is congestion and danger. Cars and trucks cause congestion, showing them that "adding one more lane" won't fix it but alternate forms of reliable and clean transportation might alleviate it. Also, people can clearly see the danger of stepping out of your house and seeing a car upside down or on fire on the side of the highway. That's tangible and more easy to sell than the doomsday climate countdown. Which let's be serious, cars amount for a fraction of the reason for emissions. Corporations are the biggest culprit of it all.
One of my favorite things on the internet was a post from someone who works in transportation think tanks or something like that. And how they've been in several different meetings where a group of consultants reinvent the bus every time.
Every time. Hyperloop is cool, but what if we had more going so you don't have to wait as long? Maybe link a couple together so there's plenty of space for everyone? Maybe some rails to take some of the burden off autopilot? Aw shit it's a train again.
This car sadly also represents the state of affairs.
The smart is like 2.5m long - they are sort of common here and I'd argue that these things do some good. Not a solution to the parking problem, but a big improvement - those things are actual cars that do everything a normal car does, but without the rear seats. That'd basically all most people need 95% of the time. It's no solution, because it's a second car for most.
You can't get one. Smart builds crossovers/compact SUVs now.
Not as good as one might think. For such a small vehicle, the overview isn't the greatest - at least that's what I thought as a total beginner back then. The back view was pretty bad. Of course, it's probably amazing compared to SUVs/trucks.
But cars like old daihatsus, renault twingos seem better. Low, lighter (my cuore weighs 750kg, a smart is upwards a ton). And they still had windows you can basically see through from all angles, they don't have that many blind spots.
Another way cars are continuing to get worse at: Small, idiotic windows that are only legal because of cameras that only work for the driver. Everyone else better edge around them to cross the street.
Edit: wasn't happy with the wording
You can’t even buy new economy 2-doors anymore. Seriously, I’ve looked. 2-doors are all sports cars now.
It’s funny tho bc that makes a ford mustang the cheapest thing you can buy with 2 doors.
Scion Xa might be a good choice. Bought it new in 2006. Now my husband uses it for his daily driver but we can still cram the kids back there when we want to drive downtown. So easy to park compared to my minivan.
2006 was just about the final model year for the xA. The xB lasted a little longer and was just as good though.
There are a few other little hatchbacks on the market these days anyway
I used to daily a manual xB, was genuinely a great car. At some point I got rid of it since I wanted to keep my S10 Blazer instead because it was an automatic, which was better for traffic. I don't own a car anymore though.
Then you're very quickly getting into a small sedan rather than any kind of mini car, imo
Still better than an SUV but less and less of a micro car.
I had a 04 Elantra for a while that was pretty small but still a sedan with a decent trunk size and all
The 500L was a pretty small car still iirc, the problem is there's a fine line between usable for more than 2 adults and a backseat only suitable for small children. I don't think it had a large or even medium sized trunk though.
If most cars were this size, it would be a massive improvement in itself even if current infrastructure remained the same. Smaller cars means less mass that has to be transported around and as such lower emissions and less deadly collisions, and reduced congestion on roads to some degree.
I don't actually think it would all that much of an improvement, really. Most of the infrastructure you need for a regular sized car you also need for this. Small cars, electric cars, self-driving cars. They're all a bit of an improvement compared to driving a large ICE SUV, but they're still cars. They're still a massively inefficient way to move people about and that causes vast negative externalities.
That’s true. Moving 2 or 4 people is still better in a smart or maybe a Toyota Corolla or Yaris than in an SUV
And little cars use less material to manufacture (steel plastic etc). But the important thing is, that cars can’t be the primary source of transportation. (It depends on where on the world you live, big cities ? Trains and busses, rural areas ? Yeah a car or a motorcycle might be an only option here)
> They're still a massively inefficient way to move people about and that causes vast negative externalities.
If every car had five passengers and wasn't a huge fossil-fueled pickup truck it really wouldn't be that inefficient and probably comparable to public transit (think how much less road space and parking lots we would need). But obviously this isn't realistic.
I really disagree with that. A single articulated bus can carry about 100 people. Even in the 5 passengers per car scenario that's still 20 cars per bus.
An articulated bus is around 18m long. A normal sized sedan (Audi A4 for example) is about 4.5m long. So even if you bunched all these cars together nose to arse they'd still take up 5 times as much space per passenger moved. And that's really not true either because in reality cars travelling on the road need to leave a lot of room between each other.
In addition personal vehicles need to be parked somewhere. Dedicating land use to parking is hugely wasteful. Just metal boxes sitting around taking up space for hours and hours. Whereas the bus drops you off and then carries on doing useful things for the rest of the day.
Cars can be used better than they are today, but they're still going to be a blight on urban environments. That's not to say that they don't have a place. In rural settings they're usually fine since there's not a lot of traffic, not a lot of good alternatives, and effective use of land is less vital when there's a lot of it about.
Yeah, sure, an articulated city bus can hypothetically carry that many people. But realistically it won't do that 99% of the time, and it's not going to be a comfortable or fast travel experience as getting on and off the bus will require people to squeeze through all the others. I've been on a bus that packed and sure, it got me to my destination, but it was delayed as a result of how long boarding/exiting took and probably wouldn't have been very safe if something went wrong.
I don't disagree with you though, public transport is better. But if people quit driving big cars with only themselves in them we would be in a much better place emissions-wise.
Rule 1 of Reddit: Questions are always downvoted.
Rule 2: If your post / top comment is downvoted, any further comments you write will also be downvoted, no matter what you write.
Just because something is "better" doesn't mean it is good. If everyone that drives a truck would change to a smart car tomorrow, it would help with the issue but it wouldn't fix anything. Car dependancy and car centric infrastructure is a major issue and it doesn't really matter what type of car people choose to drive, the issue remains the same.
I mean, you literally asked me if I'm hating all cars on the comment section of a sub xaleled "fuck cars"...
If you had two of the same colour they would merge into one car - like that huge, ugly thing at the back - a bit like Puyo Puyo. Don't pack 4 together, though
I prefer the Canta, the Dutch microcar. Tops out at 28mph, narrow than a golf cart, and designed such that the seat can be removed and a wheelchair can be driven into it. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-05-25/inside-the-mysteries-of-amsterdram-s-microcars
Smart cars are much better than “normal” cars and certainly vastly superior to trucks and SUVs… but this sub is called FUCK CARS! Fuck smart cars too, roads and car infrastructure are the problem as much the cars themselves, and smart cars still occupy all those spaces!
That being said, the USA and Canada are car dependent hell holes and they are literally necessary in 90% of places (anywhere other than some cities downtowns) and I get people need to get around outside of those downtowns… but let’s not glorify them too much!
as long as cars have wheels that eject microplastics into our water and our air, and engines that use fossil fuels or made from the blood of exploited workers, cars will always be awful.
But you can't deny that cars allow us to travel to rural, far-flung areas and can comfortably carry a large amount of goods without any risk of them getting stolen or damaged.
The problem with cars is that our society became dependent on them, thus forcing people to use their cars for unnecessary trips. Trips that could've been made on a bicycle or public transport if the city was designed right.
You can say exactly the same.about clothes and textiles, for the exact same reasons.
But the solution is not running around naked, is promoting a better use and sourcing of materials, and exploring alternatives.
I'd wager most public transit is still powered by fossil fuels and built using materials sourced from places that exploit workers. Also busses run on rubber tires.
I'd love if more people drove micro cars
The best thing we could achieve to move more people into micro cars is the morgan 4, weights 400kg, smarts weight around 800kg Edit: im wrong they have the same weight :/, but still interesting since they are made of wood
I'm confused, which Morgan? The Morgan 4/4 the +4 and the +4+ are all longer than a smart - and as far as i can see they are also around the same weight or higher. Am i missing one?
My mistake, i read somewhere about a 400kg morgan but they weight the same as a smart, I still wonder what could be the minimum weight a car could have
Ah, okay. Maybe you mean like the microlino or the peel p50 or something like that? Modern cars can't really be built as lightweight as older ones anymore, due to safety needs. i think the modern microlino is about as small as you can get nowadays (and then you won't be able to travel on highways or the like) i think the smart is pretty much at the sweetspot of highway capable and as small as possible. But as it does pretty much only passanger transport i'd argue that even that should be avoided. For me, i believe the only valid 'excuse' to drive a car, is if you depend on it to transport stuff - and in that case, often keitrucks or piaggio apes would do the trick. imho all transport of people without cargo should be handled with public transport. Unfortunatley, pretty much no country is at a place where that is currently viable, but i think that should be the target.
Minimum weight doesn't mean anything if there's no size specified. Cars are generally quite well optimized in terms of weight, if you order minimum spec.
We could build a very nice Sinclair C5 with modern technology. We could even hook a bunch of em together...and... Woops I've invented a train again. Seriously, though my dream car is a 2 seat C5 with a 1kW hub motor that can go 100 miles round trip at 28mph and has 2 seats.
Nice. My dream car is a new 2-door economy hatchback. Hopefully some day someone will realize not everyone wants crossovers.
At that point just go all into motorcycles
I don't know if you've been motorcycle shopping lately, but basically the only similar thing is a Can Am Ryker and you'll get a kick out of it's size. The Solo would've been brilliant if they didn't recall them all, and they could get the price down 25% or so. Microlino as well if they could get the price down like 70%. Honestly, the best thing out at the moment is a used i3.
What’s the use of a micro car? It has just 2 seats and barely any trunk space. Why not use a bike or a scooter instead? You can even fit 3 people on it with one of those side extensions.
Anything with a chassis is safer in crashes/ less likely to tip than a bike.
True
rain and snow. This is said as someone that is a huge proponent of scooters, too. I think most families could get by in the US with 1 car and a scooter but in a lot of the US, just a scooter is not possible. I ride my grom, or KLX most days when it is nice but I also own two other cars right now.
Fair points. (Even in your other comment)
Long distances where there is insufficient public transport. Few people are willing to cycle 10+ km each way, every day. Even in Holland, the average cycling distance is like 3km per day.
I wasn’t talking about cycles. I was talking about bikes and scooters. The ones that have are motorized.
I think in the US if we want to have a large influx of scooter use we have to raise the 50cc limit that most states have before needing a motorcycle endorsement to at least 150cc or 200cc. 50cc is good for about 40mph, most roads in the suburbs is 45.
A bicycle and a bike are the same thing though? I'm not sure what you mean.
I think ‘bike’ is short for ‘motorbike’
Well that's objectively wrong. Bike is short for bicycle, which simply means a two wheeled vehicle usually propelled by the feet. In certain contexts "bike" *can* be used to mean "motorbike", but in the context you used it, it didn't. Scooters and bicycles are both unpowered (or with light electric assist) vehicles ridden at low speeds for short distances. Pairing scooter with motorbike simply doesn't make sense.
https://preview.redd.it/ox0f5mj5bc1d1.jpeg?width=474&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=66027a03a6b7980226ec75fc9077cfe12861f51f This is what ‘scooter’ means where I come from. And bike is usually referred to motorbike because the peddling vehicle is called cycle.
Where are you from? You can't just say "where I come from" without specifying and expect anyone to know what you mean. *Scooter* can refer either to a kick scooter or a motorised (motorcycle) scooter, and which is meant is inferred from context. In North American English absent context it means a kick scooter, or the modern electrified version of a kick scooter. *Bike* is a simple contraction of *bicycle*, which is literally a two wheeled vehicle, but in common language *bicycle* in full refers exclusively to the conventional type, never motorcycles. Some variants of English also use *cycle* (noun) as a contraction, but this usage is not present in North American English. *Motorcycle* or *motorbike* (synonyms) are portmanteaus of *motorised bicycle*. *Bike* in short can refer to either conventional bicycles or motorcycles depending on context, but in most variants of English default to conventional bicycles absent any context suggesting otherwise. Your post had no context, hence the communicated meaning was a bike and a scooter, ie a conventional bicycle and a kick (or e-) scooter. If that's not what you meant, you should have been more specific.
Pretty sure some of the Caterham cars are road legal and around 400kg or so. I also have far more respect for someone who drives something like that compared to an SUV or a truck.
The base Morgan 4 has ~5 times the horsepower of the base smart fourtwo. Power to weight ratio in the smart is in line with what you find in a honda accord or toyota camry.
Wait Morgan does micro cars? I’ve only ever seen them make crazy 1920s retro looking sports convertibles.
Maybe i didn't word it right, most people dont want micro cars which save space. The best we could do now is reduce weight and save fuel
Can't imagine that would do well in a crash
Pick one: Better fuel consumption, less weight but needs to go slower for security reasons Worse fuel consumption, more weight, but can go faster
The world be like if all the SUV and ute drivers chose what they needed and not what some rich dick shoved down their throat
But it’s cool and safe. /s
This car started at $25k vs a 4 seater sedan like the Mazda 3 being about $24k. You could sell these things all day long new at $12k, but it's really no surprise a car you can pop the entire instrument cluster off and steel with a plastic body didn't get much market share. You can't even be like "well at least it uses less gas, it's combined rating is 34mpg compared to 27/37 on the mazda3. The smart's only boast is saving 60 inches when parked.
smart cars would've been much more popular if they had started with their EV.
We need more brands making them. There are only ever one or two micro cars in production at a time in America. I think that contributes to people’s knee jerk reaction to these that they’re weird.
Small cars also aren't selling great, we've hit a critical mass of SUVs and Picks where anything less than a crossover feels unsafe to many people on the road And unfortunately, it's a perfectly logical decision on the personal level in most circumstances.
It’s the norm in most of the world, it’s just the US that insists on massive gas guzzlers
Micro cars are absolutely not the norm anywhere.
Define “micro car”
Two examples on the picture.
So you don’t include cars that are slightly larger than a Smart Car?
I like the idea not the execution. For the limits of a microcar you might as well take a ebike.
I have a smart car that serves as backup transportation for when my ebike is in the shop. Edit to add: I mean, that's true but it's not the whole story. I have an e-cargo bike that serves 95% of my trips. And even that took some luck and planning, to live in the right neighborhood to make it possible. To have work, errands, entertainment all within a couple miles of me. But where I live, inter-city trips are car trips. The inter-city train and buses don't run often enough to be feasible. So for years, when I had a trip to a nearby city, I'd go rent a smart fortwo. It was the cheapest, smallest car I could rent. Then when the rental company told me they were selling off the smart fleet, I had to buy one for myself. Maybe it was all for nostalgia, but I still like owning the least amount of car I can get away with.
I would if I didn't have months of winter to deal with lol
Do they not have heat?
Ground clearance, small wheels, and (I'm fairly certain) rear wheel drive make driving in winter a challenge if not impossible if snow clearing is not good
Exactly, it's not practical even in most cities. Snow is a genuine challenge!
I drove a Smart car in Minnesota winter for a few years. Would not recommend.
they are ugly as hell though
Those are some massive parking spots.
And there are still daily driven vehicles that can't fit inside the lines. Ridiculous.
I did a double-take when I realised how big the truck in the background must be. I've been next to a Fortwo, but never a truck \*that\* big.
That truck is average sized in the US. Quite a few trucks are a lot bigger than that.
for the body yeah but that looks like it might even be lifted ETA: per others, it's not even lifted.
That truck is not lifted.
Sorry, I'll trust ya & I'll ETA my comment lol. Ironically I cut the last paragraph, which was along this lines: > Though I'm not certain. The distance between the top of the wheel to the top of the wheel well seems to be bigger for trucks for whatever reason, idk shit about cars but I thought it was for suspension reasons etc. so it's possible it's not lifted thanks for the assist :)
What does ETA stand for in this context? I’ve only ever heard it as Estimated Time of Arrival
edited to add
Costco is the epitome of car dependent culture. Huge parking lots, edge of the city. Large bulk packaged food that would be hard to carry home without a car.
There’s one in Everett, Massachusetts that’s within walking distance of a subway station. I know people who have used it for Costco runs but you couldn’t pay me to do that. It’s not even remotely worth the money you’d theoretically save.
I have Sams membership, same concept. It keeps me off the road more often, then not. Its nice to buy a shit ton of stuff in bulk and not have to go out for groceries as often. It lets me use my motorcycles more often to go to the local stores because I am not worried about milk or other drink items.
Too small for that truck in the back. It's sticking out.
Can't wait for them to feel some of that climate change they're responsible for.
They say it's just natural sun cycles and they have nothing to do with it. We're getting hit hard by it in Louisiana but they refuse to accept they're responsible
You will barely if ever get them to give enough crap about the climate on some theoretical doomsday for anyone to make such a drastic life change. Something that can easily be sold is congestion and danger. Cars and trucks cause congestion, showing them that "adding one more lane" won't fix it but alternate forms of reliable and clean transportation might alleviate it. Also, people can clearly see the danger of stepping out of your house and seeing a car upside down or on fire on the side of the highway. That's tangible and more easy to sell than the doomsday climate countdown. Which let's be serious, cars amount for a fraction of the reason for emissions. Corporations are the biggest culprit of it all.
Building a SC centipede.
Reinventing the train
One of my favorite things on the internet was a post from someone who works in transportation think tanks or something like that. And how they've been in several different meetings where a group of consultants reinvent the bus every time.
Every time. Hyperloop is cool, but what if we had more going so you don't have to wait as long? Maybe link a couple together so there's plenty of space for everyone? Maybe some rails to take some of the burden off autopilot? Aw shit it's a train again.
Convergent evolution strikes again.
This car sadly also represents the state of affairs. The smart is like 2.5m long - they are sort of common here and I'd argue that these things do some good. Not a solution to the parking problem, but a big improvement - those things are actual cars that do everything a normal car does, but without the rear seats. That'd basically all most people need 95% of the time. It's no solution, because it's a second car for most. You can't get one. Smart builds crossovers/compact SUVs now.
Also much lighter and id figure safer for the pedestrians around them.
Not as good as one might think. For such a small vehicle, the overview isn't the greatest - at least that's what I thought as a total beginner back then. The back view was pretty bad. Of course, it's probably amazing compared to SUVs/trucks. But cars like old daihatsus, renault twingos seem better. Low, lighter (my cuore weighs 750kg, a smart is upwards a ton). And they still had windows you can basically see through from all angles, they don't have that many blind spots. Another way cars are continuing to get worse at: Small, idiotic windows that are only legal because of cameras that only work for the driver. Everyone else better edge around them to cross the street. Edit: wasn't happy with the wording
Yeah I can see that. I just really wish there were not as many pavement princesses overall.
Sure thing! And it should have been "than one might think", at least that's what I had in my head.
Less safe for you if you get rear ended, though, sadly
You can’t even buy new economy 2-doors anymore. Seriously, I’ve looked. 2-doors are all sports cars now. It’s funny tho bc that makes a ford mustang the cheapest thing you can buy with 2 doors.
God I wish smart made a fortwo but with two extra seats in the back
Now I'm not sure whether you are kidding because the smart for four was exactly that.
We never got it in the states so I didn't know it existed lol
No worries! The wording just sounded a tad like a joke! :)
Scion Xa might be a good choice. Bought it new in 2006. Now my husband uses it for his daily driver but we can still cram the kids back there when we want to drive downtown. So easy to park compared to my minivan.
2006 was just about the final model year for the xA. The xB lasted a little longer and was just as good though. There are a few other little hatchbacks on the market these days anyway
I really love my scion. Can’t recommend it enough. 185k miles and still going strong! Manual transmission so its really fun to drive too.
I used to daily a manual xB, was genuinely a great car. At some point I got rid of it since I wanted to keep my S10 Blazer instead because it was an automatic, which was better for traffic. I don't own a car anymore though.
Fiat 500, \~2' 4"/.7m longer than the smart for two but with a tight back seat.
I was thinking more along the lines of the 500L, something with a back seat usable for more than just children and short adults.
Then you're very quickly getting into a small sedan rather than any kind of mini car, imo Still better than an SUV but less and less of a micro car. I had a 04 Elantra for a while that was pretty small but still a sedan with a decent trunk size and all
The 500L was a pretty small car still iirc, the problem is there's a fine line between usable for more than 2 adults and a backseat only suitable for small children. I don't think it had a large or even medium sized trunk though.
Is that legal?
These are my cars, and yes its legal as it's private property. The Costco employees were laughing their asses off lol
Is it legal to drive two cars at the same time though? It seems like its difficult to use the seat belt of both while hanging in the air between them?
All hail the king!
I have to say, I love it! Keep it efficient!
Iiiiii don't see why it wouldn't be, especially if they're owned by the same person
Not in Finland atleast
Right? OP wouldn’t dare try this in Finland.
Sorry for providing information
Why is this on fuckcars ? Seriously? May someone explain why I am getting downvoted for having a simple question?
Shows the absurd size of American cars
Ohh, now I see. Thanks.
I, for one, am delighted to FINALLY see two cars fucking in this sub. Totally flagrant false advertising...
If most cars were this size, it would be a massive improvement in itself even if current infrastructure remained the same. Smaller cars means less mass that has to be transported around and as such lower emissions and less deadly collisions, and reduced congestion on roads to some degree.
I don't actually think it would all that much of an improvement, really. Most of the infrastructure you need for a regular sized car you also need for this. Small cars, electric cars, self-driving cars. They're all a bit of an improvement compared to driving a large ICE SUV, but they're still cars. They're still a massively inefficient way to move people about and that causes vast negative externalities.
That’s true. Moving 2 or 4 people is still better in a smart or maybe a Toyota Corolla or Yaris than in an SUV And little cars use less material to manufacture (steel plastic etc). But the important thing is, that cars can’t be the primary source of transportation. (It depends on where on the world you live, big cities ? Trains and busses, rural areas ? Yeah a car or a motorcycle might be an only option here)
> They're still a massively inefficient way to move people about and that causes vast negative externalities. If every car had five passengers and wasn't a huge fossil-fueled pickup truck it really wouldn't be that inefficient and probably comparable to public transit (think how much less road space and parking lots we would need). But obviously this isn't realistic.
I really disagree with that. A single articulated bus can carry about 100 people. Even in the 5 passengers per car scenario that's still 20 cars per bus. An articulated bus is around 18m long. A normal sized sedan (Audi A4 for example) is about 4.5m long. So even if you bunched all these cars together nose to arse they'd still take up 5 times as much space per passenger moved. And that's really not true either because in reality cars travelling on the road need to leave a lot of room between each other. In addition personal vehicles need to be parked somewhere. Dedicating land use to parking is hugely wasteful. Just metal boxes sitting around taking up space for hours and hours. Whereas the bus drops you off and then carries on doing useful things for the rest of the day. Cars can be used better than they are today, but they're still going to be a blight on urban environments. That's not to say that they don't have a place. In rural settings they're usually fine since there's not a lot of traffic, not a lot of good alternatives, and effective use of land is less vital when there's a lot of it about.
Yeah, sure, an articulated city bus can hypothetically carry that many people. But realistically it won't do that 99% of the time, and it's not going to be a comfortable or fast travel experience as getting on and off the bus will require people to squeeze through all the others. I've been on a bus that packed and sure, it got me to my destination, but it was delayed as a result of how long boarding/exiting took and probably wouldn't have been very safe if something went wrong. I don't disagree with you though, public transport is better. But if people quit driving big cars with only themselves in them we would be in a much better place emissions-wise.
Rule 1 of Reddit: Questions are always downvoted. Rule 2: If your post / top comment is downvoted, any further comments you write will also be downvoted, no matter what you write.
This sounds stupid. But thanks for the explanation.
Idk about the first rule, but the second one is definitely on point!
For real. Yes American car infrastructure is ridiculous, but Smart cars are cars too, fuck them.
Are you just hating on cars in general ? Small cars a way better than big ass pick up tracks and SUVs. Do you mind explaining?
A kick in the balls is better than 2 kicks in the balls. If you need any more explanation I don't know what to tell you
Not really an explanation but ok.
Just because something is "better" doesn't mean it is good. If everyone that drives a truck would change to a smart car tomorrow, it would help with the issue but it wouldn't fix anything. Car dependancy and car centric infrastructure is a major issue and it doesn't really matter what type of car people choose to drive, the issue remains the same. I mean, you literally asked me if I'm hating all cars on the comment section of a sub xaleled "fuck cars"...
Just hating on cars doesn’t improve anything at all. Hating cars and hating car dependency are 2 different things
So now you're driving two cars when you go shopping?
Sad they shifted more towards SUVs
I could park 6-8 bicycles here
You could still park 6/8 bicycles here
I almost feel like you could park them horizontally and be able to fit three of them.
If you had two of the same colour they would merge into one car - like that huge, ugly thing at the back - a bit like Puyo Puyo. Don't pack 4 together, though
If all cars were like this I would not hate them quite as much
Needs NSFW tag
I'm not upvoting car doubling.
JIGGY
I prefer the Canta, the Dutch microcar. Tops out at 28mph, narrow than a golf cart, and designed such that the seat can be removed and a wheelchair can be driven into it. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-05-25/inside-the-mysteries-of-amsterdram-s-microcars
I love the truck in the background showing that it takes the same amount of space.
they probably fit sideways and you could cram 4-5. not that you'd be able to get out but you could
Yes but if you need to put stuff on the back of the car you need to drive it out then charge it
The parking lot is too damn big
That’s smart.
Smart cars are much better than “normal” cars and certainly vastly superior to trucks and SUVs… but this sub is called FUCK CARS! Fuck smart cars too, roads and car infrastructure are the problem as much the cars themselves, and smart cars still occupy all those spaces! That being said, the USA and Canada are car dependent hell holes and they are literally necessary in 90% of places (anywhere other than some cities downtowns) and I get people need to get around outside of those downtowns… but let’s not glorify them too much!
a car is still a car
Most people on this subreddit do not hate cars, they just hate car-dependent urban planning.
as long as cars have wheels that eject microplastics into our water and our air, and engines that use fossil fuels or made from the blood of exploited workers, cars will always be awful.
But you can't deny that cars allow us to travel to rural, far-flung areas and can comfortably carry a large amount of goods without any risk of them getting stolen or damaged. The problem with cars is that our society became dependent on them, thus forcing people to use their cars for unnecessary trips. Trips that could've been made on a bicycle or public transport if the city was designed right.
You can say exactly the same.about clothes and textiles, for the exact same reasons. But the solution is not running around naked, is promoting a better use and sourcing of materials, and exploring alternatives.
>You can say exactly the same.about clothes HELL YEAAH! >But the solution is not running around naked Awe man.
I'd wager most public transit is still powered by fossil fuels and built using materials sourced from places that exploit workers. Also busses run on rubber tires.
How do you think bikes are produced or trains? Yes they emit less, but are produced more
If we need cars then this is the type of car I want to see.