Mitsubishi Colt 2005 vs Smart ForFour 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 109 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 41 HP more power than Smart ForFour, whereas torque is 65 NM more than Smart ForFour. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Smart ForFour is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Smart ForFour, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Smart ForFour. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Smart ForFour gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 310'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 21 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Colt, Mitsubishi Xpander | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Smart ForFour might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mitsubishi Colt engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.82 m | 3.75 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is larger. Mitsubishi Colt is 7 cm longer than the Smart ForFour, 2 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 10 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 155 litres | 268 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
760 litres | 910 litres | |
|
Smart ForFour has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Colt has 113 litres less trunk space than the Smart ForFour. This could mean that the Mitsubishi Colt uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Smart ForFour (by 150 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.3 metres more than that of the Smart ForFour. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`520 | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Smart ForFour, so Mitsubishi Colt quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Smart ForFour has
| |