2003 Mazda 3 vs. 2000 Smart ForFour
To start off, 2003 Mazda 3 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Smart ForFour. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Smart ForFour would be higher. At 1,600 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Mazda 3 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Smart ForFour (108 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 8 more horse power than 2003 Mazda 3. (100 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Smart ForFour should accelerate faster than 2003 Mazda 3. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2003 Mazda 3 weights approximately 285 kg more than 2000 Smart ForFour.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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:
| 2003 Mazda 3 | 2000 Smart ForFour | |
| Make | Mazda | Smart |
| Model | 3 | ForFour |
| Year Released | 2003 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1600 cc | 1499 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 100 HP | 108 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 11 seconds | 9.8 seconds |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1260 kg | 975 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4430 mm | 3760 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1690 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1460 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.2 L/100km | 6.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 47 L |
