(Before the youngsters ask - the title is a Foghat reference)
And thus is the Trinity complete: I've now owned each of the current city cars available in the US, and wrote this to share my thoughts.

The Smart Fortwo Pure:

The Fiat 500 Sport

And as of Wednesday, the Mini Cooper S



That naturally leads to comparing them. Especially since when I bought the Fiat, I test drove a new base Mini the same day and chose the Fiat 500 over it. So, now that I've run all of them, here are my thoughts:

The Smart Fortwo remains, imo, the best "city car." But that's in the purest sense, the way a Caterham 7 or Ariel Atom is a better sports car than many that strive to be more well-rounded. If you're a die-hard city dweller, using highways mostly just to jaunt to nearby suburbs (running from Chicago to, say, Old Orchard mall), it works best. It's 70hp 3-cylinder engine is sufficient, it's roomy, has great cargo capacity, gets decent mileage and you never, ever won't find a place to park it. But...

My biggest criticism will always be the transmission. I handled the auto-manual better than many, from what Smart owners that rode with me have said, but the car cried out for a stick shift. And at the time, when my driving was 99% urban, the car's performance was more than adequate.
Since then, my company moved out to Naperville and while the Smart would be able to handle the commute, I have to say it wouldn't be pleasant for me. The Smart's top speed is ~90mph, but at that speed the little 3-cylinder 1-liter is straining, and it would need to be there constantly to handle the cut-and-thrust of I-88, where maneuvers have required bursts of speed up to 100mph at times. There are people, I'm sure, that would simply move to the rightmost lane and resolutely plod along within the Smart's performance envelope (and the state's speed limit), mulishly glaring at the frustrated drivers flowing around them. That's not really me (nor many of TCL, I suspect). I never had to do it, so this is just speculation.

The Fiat 500 Sport would have no such issues, especially now that they've added the Abarth and Turbo models to the line. The Fiat 500 is the perfect compromise between the two city car extremes - it's got a similar upright and up high seating position to the Smart Fortwo, but the sportier demeanor and upscale quality of the Mini Cooper. It's also a bit shorter, so has almost Fortwo-like versatility when it comes to parking around the city. I'll spoil the ending for you: the Fiat 500 is my favorite. Of the three, it's the best all-rounder in terms of driving fun, useability, value, and performance.

So how'd I end up with a Mini this time around? Well, when I decided that I would sell my M Coupe and get an M Roadster next spring, that meant getting something reasonably practical as a daily driver for the winter. My first impulse was to get a 500 Abarth, but that would have me breaking pretty much even on the trade for the Z4MC unless I ordered one and though roadsters run cheaper than coupes, I've got some ideas for my next one and will need the cash (evilgrin). Once I dropped my price range, I was looking at getting either another 500 Sport or a used Cooper S. As they say, when deciding between two vices, pick the one you haven't tried before. The Mini also had the temptation of Abarth-like performance while getting a fat wad of money back.

So how's the Mini? I test drove the base Cooper last time, so the extra power is nice. The twin-scroll turbo is almost lag-free, like my old Solstice GXP, and gives the car nice get up and go for the size, though there's a bit of torque-steer when I really get on it. I've long felt run-flats aren't ready for prime time and the Mini's previous owner agreed - it's running on regular tires, which seriously improves the ride and handling (and saved me some bucks, as I was definitely going to do this). The lower seating position is a bit nicer than the other two, and the sport seats fit well and give decent grip. The steering is decent - I'd like more feel, but I've felt worse EPS systems, though I think the 500 is better. The clutch feels a bit light, but that's more likely me, as the M Coupe's was a bit hefty. The shifter seemed a bit vague at first, but I'm getting the hang of it. It's got a carbon Works shifter, and I'd like to try a stock one and see if I like it better. (Oddly, it's the only original part that wasn't in the car - the PO conscientiously included everything needed to return the car to stock). I thought it might be a bit of wear, but I sat in a new one and it felt about the same.

I've got the same minor gripes I had a year ago: content cost and design. Though mine came well-specced as a used car, the pricier Mini misses some features as options that the Fiat has standard. Reading the included 2009 catalog, I splutter in outrage at the cost of things on the original owner's behalf. And that mid-mounted giant dumb-a$$ speedo just kills me. In fact, the entire center stack is just a retro-themed mess - the stereo controls are all over the place. I will say I'm impressed with the quality if not the design - there's no trim-wear or breakage, no rattles or jiggles; it's held up better than my Boxster in that regard. And after the Boxster and M Coupe, I'm loving the mileage.

In sum, I liked all three cars overall, but rank them Fiat 500, Mini Cooper, and Smart Fortwo. I could see the Mini taking the number one spot if not for some artificial constraints on it. One is the run-flats - it would work better without them, but I know BMW is putting them on everything without an M badge currently, so I can't blame the Mini for that. The interior design's faux-retro leanings, though, is all on them. I wish that, rather than mimicking what the old Mini did, they mimicked what it went for - a philosophy of form over function and simplicity. Some grouse that the Fiat 500 feels cheaper. I agree, and say it should. So should the Mini. That's where the roots of both cars lie - fun, cheap city runabouts. The Fiat 500 seems more true to its roots than the Mini, and in my opinion is somewhat the better car for it. Just my two cents.

 

Pretty thorough review for how brief it is; nice job on that.

I haven't driven any of the smart cars, and I don't really care to, but I have driven a 500 and 500 Abarth. The 500 I found not great, definitely better than any Toyota but not on the same playing field as the MINI. The Abarth I could definitely live with as a daily driver. It's fun to drive, quick, and the Abarth seats are pretty comfortable but it still didn't seem to have the personality of my MINI. I find it strange that a German car has a little more personality than an Italian car, usually it's the other way around.

I think you're the only person I've ever met who doesn't like the MINI's interior. It's always the first thing people comment on when they see my car. You said you'd like the interior to feel cheap, I can kinda see the ideology behind that but it doesn't really make sense to argue that a big plus of the car is actually a bad thing. The 500's spedo is miles better looking than the MINI's but everything else is plasticky, boring, and a little cheap looking like you kinda said.

The 500 and the MINI are pretty comparable but there is still a $5k base price difference and I think that little extra cost shows. Anyways, good review and I'm obviously biased as I own a MINI and couldn't be happier!

 

There aren't any Fiat 500s as old as the MINI yet here in the US, but I'd have to say that the extra money spent on materials does show - the seats, switch-gear, handles, everything in the interior is wearing incredibly well. I can't imagine my 500 Sport would look this good with the same years and miles.

That said, my issue with the interior is the design - the way the stereo crawls all over the center console, the retro flip switches, and the giant center speedo that could obviously be smaller and in front of the driver. The Fiat 500 uses a single round gauge like the MINI - it's a quarter the size and has all the same information on display.

That's just an observation, and not meant to indicate I'm unhappy with the car - I like it quite a bit.

 

You didn't indicate you're unhappy with it, you made it clear that you liked all three in their own ways.

The standard radio seems like it could definitely be laid out better, it really is all over the place. I have the connected option which fixes that. The only control I have for the radio is a 7-way turney **** and a volume dial on the CD slot. I absolutely love how easy it is to use and I find everything about it very intuitive. I've never used the standard radio but I'd imagine it's not as nice to use.

The nav screen also fixes the problem of the giant speedo. It slaps a 7" quite hi-res screen in the middle of the speedo and the needle hovers around the outer edge of the screen. I also love the tiny bit of design where they purposely cut off the hard corners of the screen and rounded them off with the speedo. It lets the big rectangular object up front and center in the dash blend in very nicely with the rest of the rounded retro interior.

I'd personally rather have my current speedo with the nav screen in the middle as opposed to the really cool 500's. I don't like the R53's screen, it looks out of place as it's a rectangle sitting inside a circle. But in the R56 everything is perfect

So I'll stop kinda sorta but not really arguing now because I don't want to take away from your post. Both the 500 and MINI have outstanding interiors compared to some of the crap other auto makers put out. Now you need to add a Scion iQ to your line up haha! Thanks again for the great review!

 

While I love my MINI, I was able to drive a Fiat 500 on a couple of occasions while living in Italy. I was surprised to find that I actually liked the 500. The interior was well done and more spacious than I thought it would be. The first Fiat 500 I rented was a diesel version and it was much better than the petrol version I rented later. The petrol version seemed very sluggish and had a hard time keeping up on the autostrada, especially when going up hills. The diesel had plenty of get up and go, plus the gas mileage one would expect from a diesel. It's a nice car, but just not my style. I wish Fiat would bring over some of their other models like the Panda and the Punto. The new Puntos are pretty sharp looking little hatchbacks.

 

The point of posting was to foster comments and encourage discussion, so I'm glad you did. Hopefully the thread will help someone that's trying to decide between the three - without the expense of buying all of them.

 

For any interested in comparing, add a fourth (and somewhat obscure) car to the list...the Scion iQ. Bigger than a ForTwo, smaller than a 500, it has a semi-useful back seat. If you don't mind a CVT (pretty useful in a city car), go for the TRD suspension bits and it'll handle like a MINI.

 

epb, in the LCI version of the MINI they corrected the stereo controls. They have 2 scroll wheels instead of 1 making everything more intuitive. However, the best solution is to just order MINI connected which is fantastic and solves the giant speedo issue.

 

I like my giant speedo
I reminds me I am in a Mini