Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by petrol engines and utilizing the 3-door hatchback body style within the same 'Micro car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (rear for the Smart and front in the case of the Seat). The first one has a Smart-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 3-cylinder, 6-valves 70hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 50hp engine designed by Škoda.

The fact that the Smart got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, isn't really an advantage, taken the poor 3-star rating it received. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the micro car segment, which is generally a misfortune safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Spanish car offers a considerable difference of 17% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Smart does have a slight advantage, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Smart with an average rating of 4.3, and models under the Seat badge with 4.5 out of 5. Independent research findings rank City-Coupe as average reliability-wise, and Arosa is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the German car rank it on average as 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.3 out of 5.

Smart is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.5 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 135 kilometers per hour, 16km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the German car, averaging around 5.1 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (55 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 14% difference compared to the Spanish car.

Smart appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In this case though, it seems that both cars show similar levels of passenger protection all together, so that won't break a tie. But one thing that actually could is the performance, with Seat offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the Smart. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.