VIDEO: Smart vs. Ferrari
If you stick an engine that can rev well into five-digits in any article of wheeled transport, we start getting weak in the knees. Although we've already seen what happens when you stick a 'Busa motor in DC's diminutive Smart ForTwo, we haven't seen this particular transplant recipient until now.
Peter Bee found the 60-ish horses available from his ForTwo inadequate for his daily duties (no, we have no idea what his duties entail) and sought the help of the British firm Z Cars to add a little boost to his compact commuter. Z Cars are the blokes that have the dastardly tendency of throwing R1 motors into classic Minis and they graciously accepted the challenge that Mr. Bee laid down.
The result is a ForTwo equipped with a 180-hp GSXR1000 motor that can run the 1320 in 12.4 and reaches 60 in a few shakes above 4 seconds.
What do you do with that kind of forward progression? Naturally you meet up with a Ferrari F430 and challenge it to a drag.
Want more information about the "Diablo" and its creators? It's all available with a simple click of 'Read' below.
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
DPC car videos 3:35PM (9/08/2006)
Great video, I would love to have that smart car and race pinks with a Ferrari.
Reply
Corey 3:44PM (9/08/2006)
Baddddddddd mofo.
Reply
jack 3:48PM (9/08/2006)
Replace this test in a track !
Reply
Alex 3:54PM (9/08/2006)
The F430 had a late start.
Would be more interesting if they both started at the same time.
Reply
Ben 3:57PM (9/08/2006)
That's a great video, but the Ferrari obviously had a bad driver, and a bad start. The F430 Road & Track tested ran the 1/4 mile in 11.7 seconds.
Reply
RP 4:00PM (9/08/2006)
And, with the Smart, you get the girls!
Reply
Michael Bakshi 4:12PM (9/08/2006)
A Camry would totally smoke both cars.
Reply
Mustang 9:43PM (9/08/2006)
Sure that Smart might be the quicker car, but you'll still look like a dork driving it.
Reply
lalaland 5:25PM (9/08/2006)
What happens to the hopped-up Smart when you turn the steering wheel? earthskyearthskyearthsky...
Reply
Bob_Ericson 4:42PM (9/08/2006)
Cool video.
Work on your engrish:
"If you stick an engine that can rev well into five-digits in any article of wheeled transport, we start getting weak in the knees."
WTF?!
Reply
Sam 4:42PM (9/08/2006)
Why?
The smart is about as aerodynamic as a brick.
Reply
mike 4:58PM (9/08/2006)
Yea, that Ferrari driver showed once again that most (I said most, not all) exotic car buyers have more (family) money that sense. What was more impressive; the Smart's run, the complete lack of understanding about how to drive a car by the Ferrari, or the Ferrari's attempt to show us what really expensive pistons look like as they blow thru the hood?
On a side note, I think the Ferrari went through 10 or 12 gallons of fuel during that display while the Smart probably use, what, 3 or 4 cups? I think the also have the same luggage space!
Reply
Saracen 5:20PM (9/08/2006)
I thought F430's had launch control. Getting consistent times with that car should be a no-brainer.
Reply
jrhmobile 6:02PM (9/08/2006)
I wouldn't go as far as to say this video was bogus, but it was irrelevant. The Ferrari driver launched soft and shifted slowly -- like a guy who didn't want to spend $40,000 for a clutch change next week. The Smart shoe went for big Rs and dumped the clutch.
I'm really impressed with how that For2 hooked up, but if I did that my Stoplight Grand Prix career would end before I made it across town. And I did the math ... 400 meters is less than 8 feet short of a quarter mile. So 13.40 for an F340 is lame and a 13.29 for a Smart car has gotta be a big surprise ...
The link is awesome. The engineering in the subframe is impressive, and the comments are a scream! I especially liked the ones that considered the top-heavy, short-wheelbase package and predicted the car would roll easier than dice in Vegas.
Reply
JSM 5:38PM (9/08/2006)
Watched the video three times, then thought, let's go to the comments and see how many bozos think the ferrari just got a lat start. The Smart has SUBSTANTIALLY less inertia to overcome then the Ferrari so of course it's going to win the first 20 feet - the fact is the ferrari starts to move forward at exactly the same time as the smart, it just takes several more tenths to build up any momentum. As mentioned, the ferrari does have launch control, even if most exotic drivers are dopes, that was a fair test.
Reply
epp_b 5:34PM (9/08/2006)
Take it on a real track where real racing occurs. Then watch in hilarity as the Smart rather "unintelligently" understeers into the nearest object sticking out of the ground.
Reply
Riker 6:09PM (9/08/2006)
Bob_Ericson,
His sentence was a little cumbersome, but not so bad as to warrant a WTF...
"If you stick [A] in [B], we start getting weak in the knees."
[A] = an engine that can rev well into five-digits
[B] = any article of wheeled transport
As far as grammar goes, the only thing I could nitpick is the word 'in' between [A] and [B]. It should be 'into'.
Other than that, no harm, no foul.
Reply
dave 6:20PM (9/08/2006)
only way a camry would smoke both cars is on hard exceleration, the camry would probably catch fire. oops, another recall.
Reply
Nat 6:22PM (9/08/2006)
Actually, if you watch the brake lights it does appear that the Ferrari got a half a second or more of a late start. That really doesn't diminish the wow factor though.
Reply
Jonny Rock 7:41PM (9/08/2006)
Too bad the Smart went lean right as some guy walked across the screen. I wonder how much a new set of Hayabusa pistons'll run ya.
And yes, Euro F430's have launch control. It's only US Spec that don't.
Reply