Smart ForFour 2014 vs Citroen C1 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 60 HP | 68 HP | |
| Torque: | 91 NM | 93 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.7 seconds | 13.7 seconds | |
|
Citroen C1 is a more dynamic driving. Smart ForFour engine produces 8 HP less power than Citroen C1, whereas torque is 2 NM less than Citroen C1. Due to the lower power, Smart ForFour reaches 100 km/h speed 3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.7 | 4.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.8 l/100km | 5.1 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C1 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Smart ForFour consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C1, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Smart ForFour could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Smart ForFour consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C1. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 28 litres | 35 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 480 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen C1 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Citroen C1) 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Smart ForFour engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 20 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Dacia Logan, Dacia Sandero, Renault Twingo | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota Yaris, Toyota Aygo, Peugeot 107, Peugeot 108 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Citroen C1 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.49 m | 3.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Smart ForFour is larger. Smart ForFour is 6 cm longer than the Citroen C1, width is practically the same , while the height of Smart ForFour is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 184 litres | 139 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
975 litres | 751 litres | |
|
Smart ForFour has more luggage capacity. Smart ForFour has 45 litres more trunk space than the Citroen C1. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Smart ForFour (by 224 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 8.7 meters | 9.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Smart ForFour is 0.8 metres less than that of the Citroen C1, which means Smart ForFour can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`390 | 1`190 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | Smart ForFour has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C1 has serious deffects in 90 percent more cases than Smart ForFour, so Smart ForFour quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 8000 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Smart ForFour has
|
Citroen C1 has
| |