Smart ForFour 2014 vs Renault Twingo 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 0.9 Petrol | 0.9 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 136 NM | 135 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 10.8 seconds | |
| Smart ForFour and Renault Twingo have the same engine power, but Smart ForFour torque is 1 NM more than Renault Twingo. Smart ForFour reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 | 4.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Twingo is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Smart ForFour consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Twingo, which means that by driving the Smart ForFour over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Smart ForFour consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Twingo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 28 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 430 km with real consumption | 580 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Twingo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Renault Twingo) 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: | 12 years | 12 years | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.49 m | 3.60 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.65 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.55 m | |
| Smart ForFour is 11 cm shorter than the Renault Twingo, 1 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 184 litres | 219 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
975 litres | no data | |
|
Renault Twingo has more luggage space. Smart ForFour has 35 litres less trunk space than the Renault Twingo. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 8.7 meters | 8.7 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`450 | 1`382 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Renault Twingo is better rated in child safety tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Smart ForFour has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Twingo has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Smart ForFour, so Smart ForFour quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8000 | 5000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Smart ForFour has
|
Renault Twingo has
| |