Smart ForFour 2014 vs Fiat 500 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 0.9 Petrol | 0.9 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 136 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 12.3 seconds | |
| Smart ForFour engine produces 15 HP less power than Fiat 500, whereas torque is 9 NM less than Fiat 500. Despite less power, Smart ForFour reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.3 | 4.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km | |
|
The Smart ForFour is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Smart ForFour consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Fiat 500, which means that by driving the Smart ForFour over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Smart ForFour consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Fiat 500. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 28 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 1060 km in combined cycle | |
| 450 km with real consumption | 780 km with real consumption | ||
| Fiat 500 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Fiat 500) 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: | 13 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Renault Clio, Dacia Logan, Renault Captur, Nissan Micra | Used also on Alfa Romeo MiTo | |
| 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: | 3.49 m | 4.15 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.66 m | |
|
Smart ForFour is smaller. Smart ForFour is 66 cm shorter than the Fiat 500, 12 cm narrower, while the height of Smart ForFour is 11 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 184 litres | 343 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
975 litres | no data | |
|
Fiat 500 has more luggage space. Smart ForFour has 159 litres less trunk space than the Fiat 500. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 8.7 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Smart ForFour is 2.4 metres less than that of the Fiat 500, which means Smart ForFour can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`420 | no data | |
| Safety: | |||
| Smart ForFour scores higher in safety tests, but Fiat 500 is better rated in child safety tests. The Smart ForFour scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Smart ForFour has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Fiat 500 has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than Smart ForFour, so Smart ForFour quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 9600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Smart ForFour has
|
Fiat 500 has
| |