Renault Twingo 2014 vs Smart ForFour 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 0.9 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 70 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 91 NM | 136 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.5 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Smart ForFour is a more dynamic driving. Renault Twingo engine produces 20 HP less power than Smart ForFour, whereas torque is 45 NM less than Smart ForFour. Due to the lower power, Renault Twingo reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 | 4.2 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 35 litres | 28 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 770 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 430 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Twingo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Renault Twingo) 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Dacia Logan, Dacia Sandero, Smart ForFour | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Renault Clio, Dacia Logan, Renault Captur, Nissan Micra | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.60 m | 3.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.65 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.55 m | |
| Renault Twingo is 11 cm longer than the Smart ForFour, 1 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 219 litres | 184 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 975 litres | |
|
Renault Twingo has more luggage capacity. Renault Twingo has 35 litres more trunk space than the Smart ForFour. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 8.7 meters | 8.7 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`360 | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Smart ForFour has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Twingo has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Smart ForFour, so Smart ForFour quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5200 | 8200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Twingo has
|
Smart ForFour has
| |