Smart ForTwo 2012 vs Toyota iQ 2009
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 61 HP | 68 HP | |
| Torque: | 89 NM | 91 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.8 seconds | 14.7 seconds | |
|
Toyota iQ is a more dynamic driving. Smart ForTwo engine produces 7 HP less power than Toyota iQ, whereas torque is 2 NM less than Toyota iQ. Due to the lower power, Smart ForTwo reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 | 4.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.8 l/100km | 5.6 l/100km | |
|
By specification Smart ForTwo consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota iQ, which means that by driving the Smart ForTwo 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 ForTwo consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota iQ. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 33 litres | 32 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 820 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 (Toyota iQ) 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 21 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota Yaris, Citroen C1, 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. Toyota iQ might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Toyota iQ 2009 1.0 engine: Engine often vibrates and has difficulty starting in cold weather. Timing chain lifetime is not very long. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 2.70 m | 2.99 m | |
| Width: | 1.56 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.57 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Smart ForTwo is smaller, but higher. Smart ForTwo is 29 cm shorter than the Toyota iQ, 12 cm narrower, while the height of Smart ForTwo is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 32 litres | |
|
Smart ForTwo has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Smart ForTwo has 188 litres more trunk space than the Toyota iQ. The Toyota iQ may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 8.8 meters | 7.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Smart ForTwo is 1 metres more than that of the Toyota iQ, which means Smart ForTwo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`020 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Toyota iQ has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Smart ForTwo, so Toyota iQ quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 7600 | 4800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Smart ForTwo has
|
Toyota iQ has
| |