Smart ForTwo II vs Daewoo Matiz II (M200): specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
Smart · 2007–2014
ForTwo II
- Power
- 52 kW71 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- -
- Top speed
- -
Photo: M 93 / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 3.0 de
Daewoo · 2005–2009
Matiz II (M200)
- Power
- 49 kW67 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- 14.1 s
- Top speed
- 156 km/h
In plain words
Smart ForTwo II has more power: 52 kW (71 PS) against 49 kW (67 PS) for Daewoo Matiz II (M200). Daewoo Matiz II (M200) is the older design (from 2005); Smart ForTwo II arrived in 2007. Our catalog has no 0–100 km/h for the Smart ForTwo II yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Full specifications
| Smart ForTwo II | Daewoo Matiz II (M200) | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | 1.0 · 52 kW (71 PS) | 1.0 SE, manual · lpg / cng · 49 kW (67 PS) |
| Production years | 2007–2014 | 2005–2009 |
| Body | Hatchback, Convertible | Hatchback |
| Country | France | South Korea |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 52 kW (71 PS) 70 hp Better | 49 kW (67 PS) 66 hp |
| Power, all versions | 52 kW (71 PS) 70 hp | 38–49 kW (52–67 PS) 51–66 hp |
| Torque Why it matters: Torque is the pulling force you feel when accelerating from low revs, towing or climbing hills. | No data | 91 Nm 67 lb-ft |
| 0–100 km/h Why it matters: A shorter 0–100 km/h time means quicker getaways and safer merging onto fast roads. | No data | 14.1 s |
| Top speed Why it matters: Top speed hints at how relaxed the car is at motorway speeds, even if you never reach it. | No data | 156 km/h 97 mph |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | No data | LPG / CNG |
| Engine | 1,000 cc · 3 cyl 1.0 l | 995 cc · 4 cyl 1.0 l |
| Gearbox | No data | 4-speed automatic |
| Drive | Rear-wheel drive | Front-wheel drive |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Boot Why it matters: A bigger boot fits more luggage, shopping or a pram. | 340 l 12.0 cu ft | No data |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | 4.6 l/100 km 51.1 mpg US | No data |
| CO₂ | No data | 139 g/km |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Better marks the stronger figure - only for measurable specs (power, torque, 0–100 km/h, consumption, boot, weight).