Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Dimensons & Outlines
Engine
Performance (manual gearbox)
Performance (automatic gearbox)
Expenses
Virtual Adviser's™ opinion
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 Škoda and rear in the case of the Smart). The first one has a Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 3-cylinder, 12-valves 60hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 70hp engine designed by Renault.
SafetyBoth vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the Škoda 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. Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Czech car offers a marginal difference of 5% more metal.
ReliabilityManufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Škoda with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Smart badge with 4.3 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Citigo 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 the Czech car rank it on average as 4.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economyBoth of the cars accelerate exactly the same, so we couldn't put one above the other. Car No. 1 reaches top speed of 151 kilometers per hour, 9km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 4.3 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (66 mpg), in combined cycle.
Verdict
Škoda 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 Czech car offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. It all continues in the same direction, with Škoda offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Škoda. 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. 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 more than 12.000 different ones in our database.