Smart Roadster - Any good

[Killer2005]

Afternoon all. The sad time has come that I need to bite the bullett, become slightly more sensible and sell my S2000. In summary, I'm planning on buying a house next year, and this will give me 2-3k initially towards deposit after I've bought a replacement.

This weekend the Smart Roadster has caught my attention. I'm aware it won't quite be as fast as the S2000 but what's it like to live with? There's one relatively local that I can have a look at if needs be.

Budget around £2k. Other options I've considered
- BMW e46
- Toyota MR2 mk2
- MX5 mk1/2

Thanks in advance

[james_gt3rs]

I guess it depends if you need a proper manual gearbox or not.

[300bhp/ton]

Killer2005 said:

Afternoon all. The sad time has come that I need to bite the bullett, become slightly more sensible and sell my S2000. In summary, I'm planning on buying a house next year, and this will give me 2-3k initially towards deposit after I've bought a replacement.

This weekend the Smart Roadster has caught my attention. I'm aware it won't quite be as fast as the S2000 but what's it like to live with? There's one relatively local that I can have a look at if needs be.

Budget around £2k. Other options I've considered
- BMW e46
- Toyota MR2 mk2
- MX5 mk1/2

Thanks in advance

I really like mine. Had it for 3 1/2 years now and have done 45,000+ miles in that time.

It's my daily (circa 80 miles a day) and lives outside 24/7.

Typically I get 52-55mpg out of it, with a low of 38 and a high of 67mpg.


+ points:

• looks
• rarity
• usable boot space
• mpg
• fun factor
• it feels a lot faster than it is
• lots of grip & good handling
• feel factor
• easy to use soft top
• easy to use/live with sports car
• engine note

- points:

• it feels a lot faster than it is
• it isn't fast in a straight line
• can be a little fickle on occasions
• crap in town or used as a city car

neutral points:

• gearbox, this seems to be love or loathe. Personally I think you need to do two things:

1) Give it a chance, a 5 min test drive is not long enough to get used to the gearbox
2) Work with it, not against it. If you fight the gearbox it'll never work for you, work with it and it becomes a gem.

I strongly believe the gearbox is one of the best attributes of the car, but some people will always claim it is one of the worst.

• The interior is nicely styled, but has some cheap looking plastic. But to be fair it was a cheap car!

_____________________________________

• 15" wheel ones have very cheap tyres. The 17" Brabus rims are prone to bending and buckling.

• The air con pipes are prone to cracking, even when replaced. I opted for a non air con car as you don't need air con in a car like this.

• Body kits and optional extras all add weight to the car and aren't needed.

• They can leak. But as I say, mine lives outside all year round.

_____________________________________________

For the record, I've owned a couple of MGF's previously. I like these and MX-5's. But the Roadster makes both them feel massive, blobby and rather dimwitted.

An e46 will be dull by comparison.

Edited by 300bhp/ton on Monday 16th September 14:41

[danp]

mr2 mk3..can prob just about get a facelift one.

[Bill]

I'd be looking at mk3 MR2s in preference to your other options.

IMO the Smart Roadster is underpowered/heavy and the gear change is dire.

[Craikeybaby]

I quite like the Smart Roadsters, they are a bit different.

I'd still suggest a mk3 MR2 at this price range though. Especially if you can get a facelift (03+) one.

[james_gt3rs]

You're looking at around £3000 for a facelift MR2 Roadster. Great car though!

[Motorrad]

My MIL has the Brabus version. It looks a great bit of kit from the outside, less so as a passenger inside. Ride seemed harsh but it sounded pretty good. I think they've got a lot of character and hers is worth more or less what she paid for it 2yrs ago.

[kambites]

My feelings:

Chassis: Very good. Light enough to be fun; well balanced with well-chosen spring/damper settings and low enough levels of grip to be entertaining at sensible speeds.

Drivetrain: Woeful. The gearbox is terrible - very slow to engage the clutch when pulling away; slow to respond to change requests once moving and jerky when it does change. Add in the engine's significant turbo lag and it's possibly the worst drive-train I've ever experienced.

Controls: Throttle (laggy) and steering (very low-geared with no feel) are poor, brakes are pretty decent.


So overall a mixed bag, and one that very much gives he impression of a missed opportunity. Fit a decent steering rack and a manual gearbox and it would be a very good car. Replace the engine with something normally aspirated and it could be great. I'd love to drive a bike-engined version. If you're comparing standard cars, buy a mk3 MR2 - it's a vastly superior car.

[300bhp/ton]

Bill said:

I'd be looking at mk3 MR2s in preference to your other options.

IMO the Smart Roadster is underpowered/heavy and the gear change is dire.

Heavy??? What other modern mass produced sports car (available for this money) weigh less than 790kg?

[Bill]

300bhp/ton said:

Heavy??? What other modern mass produced sports car (available for this money) weigh less than 790kg?

Considering its size and construction it's heavier than you'd expect, they'd have got away with it if it had a proper engine though.

IIRC though it was the same price as an MX5/MR2 when new. As someone said it's a missed opportunity (IMO...), they look good, and you're right, they're light enough but hampered by low power and "that" gearbox.

[Craikeybaby]

james_gt3rs said:

You're looking at around £3000 for a facelift MR2 Roadster. Great car though!

I've seen a few going for £2500 recently, surely that is going to go down now that the autumn weather is arriving...

[300bhp/ton]

Bill said:

Considering its size and construction it's heavier than you'd expect, they'd have got away with it if it had a proper engine though.

IIRC though it was the same price as an MX5/MR2 when new. As someone said it's a missed opportunity (IMO...), they look good, and you're right, they're light enough but hampered by low power and "that" gearbox.

Power output is low, but that's part of the appeal and allows you to extract the performance easier and more legally.

Also they aren't as slow as the stats suggest. 0-60mph means waiting for the computer to rev the engine and then drop the clutch (it doesn't do this in normal use). And even then it only revs the engine to 3500rpm. If it had a manual box it'd probably be 2 sec quicker to 60mph simply due to the fact you'd use all the revs and all the grip and slip the clutch a little.

That said, 20-80mph is perfectly fine. And a mapped one is easier quicker in this range than most diesel VW's, Focuses or Mondeo's.


I guess the irony is, on PH the general consensus is slow, low power, poor steering and so on.

Yet if you add more weight, don't really improve the power to weight ratio, make it fwd, less good looking, less characterful engine, worse steering and generally a less fun car to drive, most of PH jumps up and down on how great it is (namely the Panda 100hp).

[_Neal_]

300bhp/ton said:

Yet if you add more weight, don't really improve the power to weight ratio, make it fwd, less good looking, less characterful engine, worse steering and generally a less fun car to drive, most of PH jumps up and down on how great it is (namely the Panda 100hp).

On the plus side, the "usable boot space" is large enough to transport that chip you carry around on your shoulder, right?

[kambites]

300bhp/ton said:

Yet if you add more weight, don't really improve the power to weight ratio, make it fwd, less good looking, less characterful engine, worse steering and generally a less fun car to drive, most of PH jumps up and down on how great it is (namely the Panda 100hp).

It's a matter of expectations. The Panda 100hp had four seats and a decent boot.

I'd argue the other bits too - the Panda has vastly better steering my my mind and a better engine and gearbox too.

[DMN]

I used mine as a daily driver for three years, come sun, rain, snow and ice, and put 30,000 on it in that time.

It never missed a beat, only real failure was a snapped spring on the front (common fault).

You'll either love it, or hate it. So the best thing to do is to take one for a test drive. They do suffer from water incursion, so you should be looking for one thats spent its life outdoors, rather than hidden away in a garage. As any serious leaks should have been fixed, or rather I'd have more confidence that they'd be done.

[DMN]

kambites said:

Drivetrain: Woeful. The gearbox is terrible - very slow to engage the clutch when pulling away; slow to respond to change requests once moving and jerky when it does change.

Sounds like the clutch needed a reteach.

[kambites]

DMN said:

kambites said:

Drivetrain: Woeful. The gearbox is terrible - very slow to engage the clutch when pulling away; slow to respond to change requests once moving and jerky when it does change.

Sounds like the clutch needed a reteach.

I've driven quite a lot of Smarts (albeit not all Roadsters) and they all had the problem. At least half a second for the clutch to engage when you try to pull away from a stand-still.

What does reteach mean anyway? Some sort of calibration software?

[300bhp/ton]

kambites said:

It's a matter of expectations. The Panda 100hp had four seats and a decent boot.

I'd argue the other bits too - the Panda has vastly better steering my my mind and a better engine and gearbox too.

I've not driven a Panda to be fair. Driven a 500 though and the steering was woeful IMO and that's before you press the city mode. The Roadster might not have the most feel, but it's better than the vast majority of fwd cars I've driven.

The engine is fine too, but you don't like turbo's period, so it was never going to be on a winner there for you. I really can't see the issue with the gearbox either. If you drive a Wedge shaped V8 TVR you won't be changing gear any quicker than the Roadster does.

[DMN]

kambites said:

I've driven quite a lot of Smarts (albeit not all Roadsters) and they all had the problem. At least half a second for the clutch to engage when you try to pull away from a stand-still.

What does reteach mean anyway? Some sort of calibration software?

As the clutch wears the biting point changes (which I'm sure you know). For what ever reason the car isn't capable of relearning as its going. So you get Merc to plug it into a PC for 30 seconds and hand over £50.