2002 MCC Crossblade vs. 2001 Smart ForFour
To start off, 2002 MCC Crossblade is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2001 Smart ForFour. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2001 Smart ForFour would be higher. At 1,499 cc (4 cylinders), 2001 Smart ForFour is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2001 Smart ForFour (108 HP) has 38 more horse power than 2002 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2001 Smart ForFour should accelerate faster than 2002 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2001 Smart ForFour weights approximately 235 kg more than 2002 MCC Crossblade. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2002 MCC Crossblade is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2002 MCC Crossblade. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2001 Smart ForFour, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control.
Compare all specifications:
2002 MCC Crossblade | 2001 Smart ForFour | |
Make | MCC | Smart |
Model | Crossblade | ForFour |
Year Released | 2002 | 2001 |
Engine Size | 599 cc | 1499 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 70 HP | 108 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 740 kg | 975 kg |
Vehicle Length | 2630 mm | 3760 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1690 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1460 mm |