2003 Smart Fortwo Into 2005 Fiat Ulysse 50% Overlap Frontal Crash Test

[@tommys1678]

I love how everyone wants to complain about how the smart would have high energy loads, Mercedes knows what they were doing and I’m pretty sure the energy involved is more than survivable in most crash tests done on the smart car.. what’s important here is not being crushed to death, not slamming your head into a steering column coming at you or having your legs crushed into a fold in the floor between the seat and foot well.. those I just described will cause serious injury causing forces. Let’s just look at the IIHS test of a Chevy Venture and a Smart Car and compare. Again Mercedes knows what they are doing and they and they took many measurements to make the smart car the safest super mini on the market and I’m certain any down side they accepted with “higher forces” from smaller crumple zones are well within whats survivable. Mercedes crash tested the smarts against the S class to prove how safe they are. Received High rating from the IIHS (and that wasn’t common back in 2008-2009) they had high ratings in NHTSA and euroncap crash tests they even had a section on the smarts website back then with owners of smarts involved in accidents where they would upload pictures and boast how safe the car was. Fun fact the Smart Fortwo was not sold as a manual in the American markets because the clutch pedal would move and possibly cause an injury. They also have been designed to use the crumple zone of the other vehicle involved in a accident to help absorb forces. Do research before looking ignorant.

[@margauxj-broussel9186]

Tommy V Nice. I agree. As a Smart owner and Smart fan let me just add that there has never been a manual Smart : it was always sold as an semi-automatic (no clutch pedal, clutch is operated through actuator).

[@whattheheck1000]

Actually, the Smart wasn't a very safe car even back in 2008. It was average for a supermini. While Mercedes does know what they're doing and their cars sold under their own brand are extremely safe, you can't repeal the laws of physics, and a Smart may have a very strong cabin but it has very little crumple zone space, which means a rougher stop that restraints can't fully compensate for. IIHS did crash tests in 2009 with 3 superminis against midsize cars from the same manufacturer, the Smart vs. Merc C-Class, Toyota Yaris vs. Camry and Honda Accord vs. Fit. The Smart and Yaris both had forces that could have proven fatal, while the Fit did a lot better, forces were very much survivable. And the Yaris was one of the worse performing superminis in '09. IARV: HIC-15 700, Nij 1.00, 60 Chest G's, 50 mm chest compression, 9.1 kN femur force, 1.00 tibia index (above these values serious injury is possible) Smart: HIC-15 1,660, Nij 0.57, 92 Chest G's, 21 mm chest compression, 12.7 kN femur force, 2.86 tibia index Yaris: HIC-15 1,483, Nij 1.13, 115 Chest G's, 38 mm chest compression, 14.4 kN femur force, 1.27 tibia index Fit: HIC-15 542, Nij 0.41, 65 Chest G's, 33 mm chest compression, 10.1 kN femur force, 1.13 tibia index The Fit was about the same price as the Smart, had 3 more seats, and similar gas mileage, and could protect the driver from dying in a 40 mph head on collision with a midsize car, something the Smart and Yaris couldn't guarantee. High ratings from the IIHS were very common in 2008-2009, they actually had gone to letting manufacturers crash test their cars instead of crashing every one of them themselves in the front offset test, and most of the new cars were doing well in the side impact and other tests as well. I actually went to the IIHS twice, in 2008 and 2009. My mom also owes her life to a 2008 model car (a Honda Accord, not a Smart). On November 25, 2008, IIHS announced that 72 different car models had gotten a 2009 Top Safety Pick. Guess which car wasn't there? The Smart. In the offset crash test at 40 mph designed to represent a Smart hitting another Smart head on, the dummy's head hit the steering wheel through the airbag, something that only happened on about 15% of cars at that time. The Smart also had only a combination side and head airbag instead of the safer separate side torso/side curtain airbag design. June 16, 2020 8:18 am

[@tommys1678]

whattheheck1000 compared to many super minis of that time the smart really stood out as far as the structural integrity goes especially since Japan and Korea were exclusively selling death traps in the “sub compact” category. There’s no argument in that. Especially when it comes to side crash tests.

[@pycanthusderossi4665]

I don't see the results from the sensors but it looks like dummy occupants of the Fortwo had to withstand a lot bigger momentum than those in the Fiat. Not to say that the Fiat is better or that the Fortwo doesn't have good safety measures but the difference in mass of the two cars does mean a lot in this crash. The crumple zone in the Fiat looks like it made it better for the occupants of both cars.

[@Outindacold]

There's practically nothing in the Smart car to absorb all the energy from a crash. I wouldn't want to riding in one when it hit something, it would most likely be equivalent to jumping from a 2 story building and landing on your torso when the seat belts lock up. OUCH

[@alm7707]

Well we used to feel safe driving our '62 Impala, but I feel safer in my smart car.

[@Wasmachineman]

A Smart really is a miracle of technology, such little deformation in such a small car is unheard of. Then again, you'd be pulp in a crash with a Fortwo anyways.

[@tommys1678]

Wasmachineman nah

[@tdog9150]

I lov my smart , yu take your chances on anything , is the car going to do good against a truck ?? No , but neither would a motorcycle... lot of people look at it and say no way ... I feel perfectly safe in mine ... I want them to bring back the gas motor.. I would go get another one ,,

[@alm7707]

I'd take my chances in a smart car over a motorcycle any day! I drive mine any chance I get. Last summer I made 4000 km driving on gravel roads, and now I'm driving in snow. The trouble with mine is that it is so easy to speed in it. I can hit 100kph in 3rd gear and still have 2 more gears!

[@EiD248]

Do not try this at home. Try it in someone else's home. "Winston Churchill"

[@dougcjohn]

Old clip… Picked up a nice clean 2016 ForTwo for RV Toyhauler… in place of a full dressed bike… much more enjoyable for an older couple. All small cars back in 2008 timeframe weren’t that safe, even larger cars lacked in many ways for safety. Crumple zone would be crush between the two cars… both occupants benefit as crush zone to slow down mass. Severe enough, it’s correct the sudden deceleration will likely kill the occupants in Smart, no matter the structural integrity… that allows the body to be removed easily. In the end, I compare to motorcycle… much more safe and added perks… clear roof, comfy quite cabin, AC, heater, side by side companion, etc… cruising around in place of 1 ton Dually for runabouts provides lot more comfort gained but reality remains… a mild wreck may be terminal… but a lot more safe than being hit on bike. Everything is relative.

[@marcinnowak8241]

Ludzie fizyki nie oszukacie to że całkiem dobrze wygląda Smart to nie znaczy że kierowca wyjdzie cało . Piszę tu o wypadku czołowym gdy fiat jechałby 80km/h i Smart 80 km/h czyli zsumowana prędkość 120km/h uwzględniam hamowanie .

[@howtobebasic2122]

the smart barley did any damage.

[@ianclaudio777]

I love Fiat cars, beautiful, stylish, usable, reliable, safe

[@FrostedFlukes]

Falo Mesmo no, they are very unreliable

[@kiinanomistaja2402]

Zach Comer The most reliable thing in a car is the owner!

[@ianclaudio777]

@@FrostedFlukes some models could be, but most popular models and utilities are reliable and it's a fact.

[@Outindacold]

JUNK...

[@ryanpham3308]

@@ianclaudio777, not the 500...

[@porkchopjp]

lets see a rear end crash

[@fightforporn2187]

7:46 из чего у смарта сделаны лонжероны? Из рельсы??

[@brodyaga2605]

😅

[@tomtheraton3058]

Make same video than the jaguar at 120kmh

[@SiemensIQ700pro]

So I think I would prefer being In the fiat because it’s got a larger crumple zone.

[@felipegondewski7842]

Smart good car 🤪👍

[@whattheheck1000]

The passenger airbag design on these early Smart cars is bad. They come out straight at the passenger and are big enough to fill the entire space between the dash and the seat, which means that they slam into the passenger. That could easily be a kid there, especially since these are 2 seater cars. The newer Smart cars have top-mounted airbags that don't get as big and occupant sensors to turn them off or reduce the force if there's a kid in the seat. They also have a bit more crumple zone to lessen the G-force on passengers. February 23, 2020 3:22 am

[@akj2387]

U are literally everywhere

[@akj2387]

U ever gonna reply? Creepy AF,

[@whattheheck1000]

Ujw Gaming hey! February 29, 2020 4:51 am

[@akj2387]

@@whattheheck1000 Have you realised how many times I've replied to you? I see you in 50% of the videos I watch... I even saw you in Neilogicals' video... Lol

[@whattheheck1000]

Ujw Gaming sorry, I haven’t meant to ignore you! Sometimes I don’t get notified of a reply by YT. March 4, 2020 3:40 am

[@Francisco-j1e]

In realtiy the other car would not be stopped, likely. 64kmh on 64kmh would be better. Wasted opportunity.

[@MrFrog_]

Smart isn't that smart then.

[@Архитектор-с2ш]

У Смарта кузов целый. Подлежит замене только передняя подвеска . Конструктивно она сделана сминаемой . Смарт - сила ! Фиат - могила ! 😬😬😬😬😬

[@s4_nick605]

do it at 60

[@hectorvazquez7929]

most likely high energy loads on the smart dummy. would not want to be in an accident in smart

[@GinToni_]

The driver in the smart is definitely dead, the G force are the problem and the smart can't absorbe this force in the same way of the Fiat.

[@CarPro1993]

The driver experience a maximum of 32.5 G's in this crash test. NHTSA's FMVSS 208 requirements allow no more than 60 G's in a 25 Mph unbelted frontal impact. Fatal injuries are extremely unlikely here.