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 Mitsubishi-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 3-cylinder, 12-valves 71hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 3-cylinder, 12-valves 75hp engine designed by Volkswagen.

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 Seat being a slightly better choice apparently. 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 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 Spanish car offers a considerable difference of 12% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Smart does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, 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. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the German car rank it on average as 3.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Seat is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.5 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 172 kilometers per hour, 27km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 4.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (67 mpg), in combined cycle.

Seat 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 Spanish car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with Seat outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Seat. 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. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.