It seems to me that Smart cars are sort of like I-pads or I
phones....trendy and their main advantage is as the "Latest" thing, an "in"
brand....not because they are actually better than other 'units"  that
perform similarly.  The Smart cars are expensive like an I-phone, when you
can get a similar or superior performing "unit" for very much less money.

  One car that has been around for ages, the CRX Honda, those sell for
about  a grand u$ed and get 50+ highway mpg. They last ~500,000 miles with
ease.  I have a friend who drives these, carries his bicycle inside,
carries his tools, even sleeps in there at times when on road trips.
 My Canadian buddies who used to own a diesel Westie...they replaced that
with some kind of newer Honda Civic (?) 4 door generic sedan.  That one,
too, gets right at 50mpg, has a trunk and four doors and might even be
likely to survive an encounter with a full size vehicle.  It will probably
still be running  fine when Smart cars are curious collector vehicles like
the Isetta.

  Those Smarts....cute little things, but really outrageously overpriced
for what you get, as far as I am concerned.  I guess you  might
occasionally stick one into a parking spot that wouldn't fit any other
vehicle, but you can do that with a cheapo scooter or a touring
motorcycle.  Probably carry more, too, on a big BMW or a Goldwing.  Putting
a transportation device into an unconventional parking space is often
"rewarded" with a citation or an impound, so there's not much advantage in
the Smart's short footprint there.

  The Funded RV crowd seems to like them, the ones who want to appear
"green" by driving an Eco-friendly second vehicle and don't consider cost
to be important.  Other RVers seem to often favor the Suzuki small 4X4s or
the Chevy Tracker because they can go driving around the "wilderness".  I
guess it would be an advantage for the Smart that if you got stuck, you
could just lift the thing out of the ditch or hole or sand, but those tiny
wheels....

  Don Hanson