Compare two cars

Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion

Car #1
Make
Model
Variant
Engine
Car #2
Make
Model
Variant
Engine

compare selected cars
2012. - 2014.
A - Micro car
hatchback, 3 door
rear
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
2012. - 2016.
A - Micro car
hatchback, 3 door
front

Marketing

!function(v,t,o){var a=t.createElement("script");a.src="https://ad.vidverto.io/vidverto/js/aries/v1/invocation.js",a.setAttribute("fetchpriority","high");var r=v.top;r.document.head.appendChild(a),v.self!==v.top&&(v.frameElement.style.cssText="width:0px!important;height:0px!important;"),r.aries=r.aries||{},r.aries.v1=r.aries.v1||{commands:[]};var c=r.aries.v1;c.commands.push((function(){var d=document.getElementById("_vidverto-725dc94bb887f000f0b279c49613751c");d.setAttribute("id",(d.getAttribute("id")+(new Date()).getTime()));var t=v.frameElement||d;c.mount("10285",t,{width:720,height:405})}))}(window,document); */ ?>

Dimensons & Outlines

2695 mm
1559 mm
1565 mm
220 liters
340 liters
33 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
3540 mm
1641 mm
1489 mm
251 liters
951 liters
35 liters
2012 Smart ForTwo
2012 Volkswagen Up!

Engine

Petrol
3 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Turbo
999 cc
102 hp
147 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
Volkswagen
1.0 R3 CHYB
Petrol
3 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Nat. Asp.
999 cc
75 hp
95 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
manual gearbox - 5 gears
840 kg
13.2 s
172 km/h
5.1 l/100km
3.7 l/100km
4.2 l/100km
98 g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

automatic - 5 gears
780 kg
8.9 s
155 km/h
6.4 l/100km
4.4 l/100km
5.2 l/100km
119 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
automatic - 5 gears
832 kg
13.9 s
171 km/h
5.9 l/100km
4.0 l/100km
4.7 l/100km
105 g/km

Expenses

3300 EUR
Price from
4000 EUR

Virtual Adviser's™ opinion

Overview

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 Volkswagen). 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 3-cylinder, 12-valves 75hp engine designed by Volkswagen.

Safety

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 Volkswagen 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, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, Up! offers a marginal difference of 8% more metal.

Reliability

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. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Smart with an average rating of 4.3, and models under the Volkswagen badge with 4.2 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 ForTwo rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Smart is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 4.3 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 155 kilometers per hour, 17km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be Up!, averaging around 4.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (67 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 24% difference compared to ForTwo.


Verdict

Volkswagen 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, Up! offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. From there things take a different direction, with Smart offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. 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 Volkswagen. 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. 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, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.

Check a car by its VIN number

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

47worldwide automotive brands
1.613different vehicle models
2.331engines
14.590specific cars