Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Marketing
Dimensons & Outlines
Engine
Performance (manual gearbox)
Performance (automatic gearbox)
Expenses
Virtual Adviser's™ opinion
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 Renault). The first one has a Mitsubishi-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 3-cylinder, 12-valves 102hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 101hp engine designed by Renault.
SafetyA 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 same number of safety stars gained in the process. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. 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, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the French car offers a considerable difference of 22% more metal.
ReliabilityI don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Smart with an average rating of 3.9, and models under the Renault badge with 4.1 out of 5. The same official information place ForTwo as average reliability-wise, and Twingo is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the German car rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.7 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economyRenault is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.1 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 188 kilometers per hour, 33km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (52 mpg), in combined cycle.
Verdict
Renault 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 significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. It all continues in the same direction, with Renault offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Renault. Nevertheless, let's not forget that people have different preferences and needs, so what really counts is your personal feel. I'm only here to help. 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™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.