Smart ForFour 2014 vs Ford KA 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 0.9 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 69 HP | |
| Torque: | 136 NM | 102 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 13.1 seconds | |
|
Smart ForFour is more dynamic to drive. Smart ForFour engine produces 21 HP more power than Ford KA, whereas torque is 34 NM more than Ford KA. Thanks to more power Smart ForFour reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Smart ForFour consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford KA, which means that by driving the Smart ForFour over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Smart ForFour consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford KA. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 28 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 790 km on highway | ||
| 430 km with real consumption | 550 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Ford KA) 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: | 3.49 m | 3.62 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.51 m | |
| Smart ForFour is 13 cm shorter than the Ford KA, width is practically the same , while the height of Smart ForFour is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 184 litres | 224 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
975 litres | 710 litres | |
| Smart ForFour has 40 litres less trunk space than the Ford KA. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Smart ForFour (by 265 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 8.7 meters | 9.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Smart ForFour is 0.6 metres less than that of the Ford KA, which means Smart ForFour can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`450 | 1`320 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Smart ForFour has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford KA has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Smart ForFour, so Smart ForFour quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Smart ForFour has
|
Ford KA has
| |