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 4-cylinder, 16-valves 75hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 3-cylinder, 6-valves 75hp engine designed by Smart.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the Volkswagen being a slightly better choice apparently. 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. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, Fox offers a potentially life-saving difference of 35% 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. 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 3.9 out of 5. Independent research findings rank 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 4.2, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

Smart is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.7 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 150 kilometers per hour, 17km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be ForTwo, averaging around 5.3 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (53 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 26% difference compared to Fox.

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, Fox beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. From there things take a different direction, with Smart offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! At the end, as much as I'd like to give you a winner here, it's simply a pure tie if you ask me. 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. 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 more than 12.000 different ones in our database.