Ford KA 2008 vs Smart ForFour 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 0.9 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 69 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 102 NM | 136 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.1 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Smart ForFour is a more dynamic driving. Ford KA engine produces 21 HP less power than Smart ForFour, whereas torque is 34 NM less than Smart ForFour. Due to the lower power, Ford KA reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 4.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.3 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km | |
|
By specification Ford KA consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Smart ForFour, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford KA could require 135 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford KA consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Smart ForFour. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 35 litres | 28 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 770 km on highway | ||
| 550 km with real consumption | 430 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Ford KA) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Smart ForFour) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.62 m | 3.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.51 m | 1.55 m | |
| Ford KA is 13 cm longer than the Smart ForFour, width is practically the same , while the height of Ford KA is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 224 litres | 184 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
710 litres | 975 litres | |
| Ford KA has 40 litres more trunk space than the Smart ForFour. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Smart ForFour (by 265 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.3 meters | 8.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford KA is 0.6 metres more than that of the Smart ForFour, which means Ford KA can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`320 | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Smart ForFour has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford KA has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Smart ForFour, so Smart ForFour quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford KA has
|
Smart ForFour has
| |