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 Citroen). The first one has a Smart-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 3-cylinder, 6-valves 75hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 3-cylinder, 12-valves 68hp engine designed by Daihatsu.

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the Citroen being a slightly better choice apparently. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the micro car segment, which is generally a misfortune safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the French car offers a marginal difference of 5% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Smart does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Smart with an average rating of 3.9, and models under the Citroen badge with 4.1 out of 5. Independent research findings rank ForTwo as average reliability-wise, and C1 is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the German car rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.1 out of 5.

Smart is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.4 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 150 kilometers per hour, 7km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the French car, averaging around 4.6 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (61 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 15% difference compared to the German 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 my opinion, everything taken into account, the French car offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. From there things take a different direction, with Smart being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Citroen. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. 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.