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. - 2017.
A - Micro car
hatchback, 3 door
front
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
2014. - 2019.
A - Micro car
hatchback, 3 door
rear

Marketing

Dimensons & Outlines

3563 mm
1641 mm
1463 mm
251 liters
951 liters
35 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
2695 mm
1663 mm
1555 mm
260 liters
350 liters
28 liters
2012 Škoda Citigo
2014 Smart ForTwo

Engine

Volkswagen
1.0 R3 CHYB
Petrol
3 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Nat. Asp.
999 cc
75 hp
95 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
Renault
1.0 H4D 400
Petrol
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Nat. Asp.
999 cc
70 hp
91 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

manual gearbox - 5 gears
829 kg
13.2 s
171 km/h
5.1 l/100km
3.7 l/100km
4.2 l/100km
98 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
manual gearbox - 5 gears
790 kg
14.4 s
151 km/h
l/100km
l/100km
4.1 l/100km
93 g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

automatic - 5 gears
832 kg
13.9 s
171 km/h
5.5 l/100km
4.0 l/100km
4.5 l/100km
105 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
automatic - 6 gears
835 kg
15.1 s
151 km/h
l/100km
l/100km
4.1 l/100km
94 g/km

Expenses

3900 EUR
Price from
5700 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 (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 75hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 70hp engine designed by Renault.

Safety

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 Škoda 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, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Czech car offers a marginal difference of 5% more metal.

Reliability

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Škoda with an average rating of 4.3, and models under the Smart badge with 3.9 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Citigo as average reliability-wise, and ForTwo is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the Czech car rank it on average as 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Škoda is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.2 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 171 kilometers per hour, 20km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 4.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (68 mpg), in combined cycle.


Verdict

Škoda is apparently more reliable, not too much, but just enough. 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 being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. 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 Škoda. 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. 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.

Check a car by its VIN number

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

47worldwide automotive brands
1.531different vehicle models
2.233engines
13.778specific cars