Smart ForFour 2004 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 8 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is a more dynamic driving. Smart ForFour engine produces 41 HP less power than Mitsubishi Colt, whereas torque is 65 NM less than Mitsubishi Colt. Due to the lower power, Smart ForFour reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Smart ForFour is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Smart ForFour consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that by driving the Smart ForFour over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Smart ForFour consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
| Smart ForFour gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 310'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Mitsubishi Colt, Mitsubishi Xpander | Used also on Smart ForFour | |
| 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: | no | yes | |
| 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: | 3.75 m | 3.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Smart ForFour is smaller. Smart ForFour is 7 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Colt, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Smart ForFour is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 268 litres | 155 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
910 litres | 760 litres | |
|
Smart ForFour has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Smart ForFour has 113 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. The Mitsubishi Colt may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Smart ForFour (by 150 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Smart ForFour is 0.3 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`450 | 1`520 | |
| 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 (€): | 1800 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Smart ForFour has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |