Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by diesel 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 75hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 3-cylinder, 6-valves 41hp engine designed by Smart.

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. 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, Lupo offers a potentially life-saving difference of 31% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Smart does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. These are the results of an independent reasearch, 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 Lupo as average reliability-wise, and ForTwo is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as Lupo rank it on average as 4.4, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.5 out of 5.

Volkswagen is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 7.5 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 170 kilometers per hour, 35km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be ForTwo, averaging around 3.4 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (83 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 26% difference compared to Lupo.

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, Lupo 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. 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. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.