Smart ForTwo 2012 vs Chevrolet Matiz 2005
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 61 HP | 64 HP | |
| Torque: | 89 NM | 87 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.8 seconds | 15.3 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Matiz is a more dynamic driving. Smart ForTwo engine produces 3 HP less power than Chevrolet Matiz, but torque is 2 NM more than Chevrolet Matiz. Due to the lower power, Smart ForTwo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.8 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Smart ForTwo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Smart ForTwo consumes 2.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Matiz, which means that by driving the Smart ForTwo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 330 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Smart ForTwo consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Matiz. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 33 litres | 38 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 590 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 710 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 570 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Chevrolet Matiz) 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 ForTwo) 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: | 2.70 m | 3.50 m | |
| Width: | 1.56 m | 1.50 m | |
| Height: | 1.57 m | 1.48 m | |
| Smart ForTwo is 81 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Matiz, 6 cm wider, while the height of Smart ForTwo is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 8.8 meters | 9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Smart ForTwo is 0.2 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Matiz. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`020 | 795 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Smart ForTwo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Matiz has serious deffects in 690 percent more cases than Smart ForTwo, so Smart ForTwo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7600 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Smart ForTwo has
|
Chevrolet Matiz has
| |