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 (front for the Volkswagen and rear in the case of the Smart). The first one has a Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 3-cylinder, 6-valves 55hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 3-cylinder, 6-valves 50hp engine designed by Smart.

The first thing to look into here would be the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests performed on the two cars. Good thing is that both vehicles got tested, with the Volkswagen 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, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, Fox offers a potentially life-saving difference of 33% 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, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Volkswagen with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Smart badge with 4.3 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Fox as average reliability-wise, and ForTwo is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as Fox rank it on average as 3.9, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

Volkswagen is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.8 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 148 kilometers per hour, 13km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be ForTwo, averaging around 4.7 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (60 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 28% difference compared to Fox.

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, Fox beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with Volkswagen outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. 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 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. 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 thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.