Smart ForTwo 2012 vs Volkswagen Scirocco 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 71 HP | 160 HP | |
| Torque: | 92 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.7 seconds | 8 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Scirocco is a more dynamic driving. Smart ForTwo engine produces 89 HP less power than Volkswagen Scirocco, whereas torque is 148 NM less than Volkswagen Scirocco. Due to the lower power, Smart ForTwo reaches 100 km/h speed 5.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.3 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.8 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Smart ForTwo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Smart ForTwo consumes 2.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Scirocco, which means that by driving the Smart ForTwo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 345 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Smart ForTwo consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Scirocco. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 33 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volkswagen Scirocco) 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 | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.56 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.57 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Smart ForTwo is smaller, but higher. Smart ForTwo is 156 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Scirocco, 25 cm narrower, while the height of Smart ForTwo is 16 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 292 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1006 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Scirocco has more luggage space. Smart ForTwo has 72 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Scirocco. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 8.8 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Smart ForTwo is 2.1 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Scirocco, which means Smart ForTwo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`020 | 1`720 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 7600 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Smart ForTwo has
|
Volkswagen Scirocco has
| |