Smart ForFour 2005 vs Smart ForTwo 2004
| Body: | Hatchback | Coupe | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.1 Petrol | 0.7 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 64 HP | 61 HP | |
| Torque: | 92 NM | 95 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.3 seconds | 15.5 seconds | |
|
Smart ForFour is more dynamic to drive. Smart ForFour engine produces 3 HP more power than Smart ForTwo, but torque is 3 NM less than Smart ForTwo. Thanks to more power Smart ForFour reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 4.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.0 l/100km | 5.9 l/100km | |
|
The Smart ForTwo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Smart ForFour consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Smart ForTwo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Smart ForFour could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Smart ForFour consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Smart ForTwo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 33 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 870 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 1040 km on highway | 800 km on highway | ||
| 780 km with real consumption | 550 km with real consumption | ||
| Smart ForFour gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Smart ForFour) 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 ForTwo) 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: | 3.75 m | 2.50 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.52 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Smart ForFour is larger, but lower. Smart ForFour is 125 cm longer than the Smart ForTwo, 16 cm wider, while the height of Smart ForFour is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 268 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
910 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 8.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Smart ForFour is 2 metres more than that of the Smart ForTwo, which means Smart ForFour can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`450 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Smart ForFour has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Smart ForTwo has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Smart ForFour, so Smart ForFour quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 2000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Smart ForFour has
|
Smart ForTwo has
| |