Ford Mustang Mach-E vs Smart #5
Biggest differences: DC charging — Ford Mustang Mach-E 150 kW, Smart #5 400 kW · AC charging — Ford Mustang Mach-E 11 kW, Smart #5 22 kW · Charging 10–80% — Ford Mustang Mach-E 36 min, Smart #5 18 min.
Ford Mustang Mach-E
The Ford Mustang Mach-E is a D-segment SUV offering four different powertrain and battery configurations with WLTP ranges from 470 to 600 km.
Smart #5
Smart #5 is a D-segment SUV offering four drivetrain variants with power ranging from 340 hp to 646 hp.
Profile against the market: Ford Mustang Mach-E vs Smart #5
Ford Mustang Mach-EExtended Range RWD
Smart #5Pro+
Ford Mustang Mach-E or Smart #5 — who wins where
Smart #5 leads 7 to 4
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmFord Mustang Mach-E +10 km
- Battery kWhSmart #5 +3 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmFord Mustang Mach-E −0.9 kWh/100 km
- Power PSSmart #5 +69 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sFord Mustang Mach-E −0.3 s
- Top speed km/hSmart #5 +20 km/h
- DC charging kWSmart #5 +250 kW
- AC charging kWSmart #5 +11 kW
- Charging ↓ minSmart #5 −18 min
- Weight ↓ kgFord Mustang Mach-E −131 kg
- Boot lSmart #5 +228 l
Technical data: Ford Mustang Mach-E vs Smart #5
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Ford Mustang Mach-E Extended Range RWD | Smart #5 Pro+ | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 600 km | 590 km | Ford +10 km |
| Battery | 91 kWh | 94 kWh | Smart +3 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 17.5 kWh/100 km | 18.4 kWh/100 km | Ford −0.9 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 150 kW | 400 kW | Smart +250 kW |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 22 kW | Smart +11 kW |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 36 min | 18 min | Smart −18 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 11.7 km/min | 22.9 km/min | Smart +11.2 km/min |
| Voltage | 400 V | 800 V | Smart +400 V |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 294 PS | 363 PS | Smart +69 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 6.2 s | 6.5 s | Ford −0.3 s |
| Top speed | 180 km/h | 200 km/h | Smart +20 km/h |
| Drivetrain | RWD | RWD | — |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 2129 kg | 2260 kg | Ford −131 kg |
| Boot | 402 l | 630 l | Smart +228 l |
| V2L (external power) | No | Yes | only Smart |
| Length | 4713 mm | 4695 mm | Ford +18 mm |
| Width | 1881 mm | 1920 mm | Smart +39 mm |
| Height | 1597 mm | 1705 mm | Smart +108 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2984 mm | 2900 mm | Ford +84 mm |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Ford Mustang Mach-E
Smart #5
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Ford Mustang Mach-E
Smart #5
Other comparisons in this class: SUV, segment D
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Why does the Smart #5 have a bigger battery but a shorter range than the Ford Mustang Mach-E?
The Smart #5 carries 94 kWh and covers 590 km, while the Ford Mustang Mach-E with its 91 kWh battery does 600 km. Energy use decides it: 18.4 against 17.5 kWh/100 km.
Which one can power appliances from a socket (V2L)?
Only the Smart #5 — its 94 kWh battery then works as a power source. The Ford Mustang Mach-E, with 91 kWh, does not offer it.
Which has the bigger boot?
The Smart #5 takes more: 630 l against 402 l in the Ford Mustang Mach-E. The difference is 228 l.
Which charges faster?
The Ford Mustang Mach-E accepts up to 150 kW DC, the Smart #5 up to 400 kW. Charging from 10 to 80% takes 36 and 18 min respectively.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.