Skoda Citigo 2012 vs Smart ForFour 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 0.9 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 95 NM | 136 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.2 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Smart ForFour is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Citigo engine produces 15 HP less power than Smart ForFour, whereas torque is 41 NM less than Smart ForFour. Due to the lower power, Skoda Citigo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 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 | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 430 km with real consumption | ||
| Skoda Citigo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Skoda Citigo) 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: | 3.56 m | 3.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.65 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.55 m | |
| Skoda Citigo is 7 cm longer than the Smart ForFour, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Skoda Citigo is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 184 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 975 litres | |
|
Skoda Citigo has more luggage capacity. Skoda Citigo has 67 litres more trunk space than the Smart ForFour. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 8.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Citigo is 1.1 metres more than that of the Smart ForFour, which means Skoda Citigo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`290 | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Smart ForFour has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Citigo has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than Smart ForFour, so Smart ForFour quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 7600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Citigo has
|
Smart ForFour has
| |