A business only exists to profit, which goes the same way for car manufacturers. Fans might have fallen in love with the brand’s philosophy or exciting products but their existence is to make money, not to answer to the whims of fans.

In the case of Smart, that profit-making direction seems to be where the brand is heading now. No more small, quirky compacts that can easily fit in tight spaces; under the stewardship of the Geely Group, the Smart cars of the 2020s are bigger and have hints of more obvious Teutonic (ie. Mercedes-Benz) designs.

The Smart #1 marked a bold new step in that direction and while it is no doubt a fully electric (BEV) SUV that has spades of character embedded within, the people behind the once cleverly packaged carmaker decided that it wasn’t enough.

A decision was probably made in the executive boardrooms of the Smart headquarters to develop a sleeker version of the Smart #1. They introduced the rear of the SUV to a hydraulic press, squished it down, stuck on the corresponding odd number to its first model, and unveiled it as a new model.

But is the Smart #3 really just a revised #1 with a coupe-like rear? Well, if I were to summarise it all in one word, the Smart #3 is mature but I know that wouldn’t be enough, so allow me to explain it further.

Hunched over with compromises

Fully imported (CBU) from China, the Smart #3 is available in Malaysia in three variants:

• Smart #3 Pro – RM 175,000
• Smart #3 Premium – RM 215,000
• Smart #3 Brabus – RM 255,000

We had the chance to drive both the Premium and the more potent Brabus variants before their official launch at the Proton test track in Shah Alam. However, those were merely first impressions of the two.

Also read: First drive: Unveiling in Malaysia next week, the Smart #3 is a dynamic sequel to the #1

This time around we spent a little bit more time on the Premium variant which would be a perfect comparison with the Smart #1, of which we were given the same variant for our review.

In terms of looks, the Smart #3 isn’t just sleeker looking than the #1, it is also bigger dimensionally. The #3 is 170 mm longer and its wheelbase is 35 mm longer than the #1 but despite the lengthier size, the #3 is less practical than the #1.

The rear seats are fixed and cannot be moved forwards and backwards like the #1 while the sloping roof meant that rear headroom can be a bit difficult for taller folks.

Still, the rear seats have a deeper base and there is enough legroom to accommodate thanks to the mostly flat floor.

The Premium variant comes standard with a tinted panoramic glass sunroof stretching above the cabin. During the first impressions drive around the Proton oval test track, the preview units of the #3 were fitted with a sunshade but for the official delivery units, it seems those shades have been removed.

As the panoramic sunroof does not come with retractable sunshades, it might sound like a no-no for our hot, humid climate. Yet, throughout our 3-day experience with the #3, we find the tinting to be adequate for Malaysian weather.

The interior layout of the Smart #3 is largely similar to the #1 with some of the familiar Mercedes-Benz-inspired layout. Some parts also seemed to be shared with the German marque but they don’t feel as exquisite as the three-pointed star.

Zaniness over usability

There are plenty of cubby holes to put all of your knick-knacks, and bag as well as a cooler storage in the middle to store zesty beverages. The #3 even has a playful side with various Easter eggs around the windows.

It’s all fun and zany until you use the infotainment head unit and it becomes more of a mess than something meant to be playful. It is essentially the same format as the one on the #1 and though I had driven it, I still do not like the execution of the Smart operating system.

Modern carmakers, particularly from China, seem to insist on having a minimalist interior by removing all the essential buttons and throwing them onto the screen. As you can also see in the photo above, the Smart's infotainment home screen is overwhelmingly confusing.

I am not alone in disagreeing with the idea of throwing basic features like adjusting the mirrors or the air-conditioning controls onto the screen. Especially when it comes to the latter, it is downright dangerous to put these essential controls in some place that is not intuitive for the driver.

While there are a few shortcut buttons below the infotainment screen, these do not offer any tactile feedback and are merely touch-sensitive. Even so, most of the controls still take place on the screen so you would have to briefly keep your eyes off the road to adjust the fan speed or bear the heat/cold until the car is stationary.

The 12.8-inch centre touchscreen is powered by a Qualcomm Snapdragon 8155 chipset which is technology familiar with mobile gaming graphics. That might be more suitable for your daily RPG quests grind but on the Smart #3, it mostly helps with animating the virtual assistant, a cheetah or a fox, if you’re missing it from the #1.

Still, with wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, these cool-looking animations felt a bit like a waste as you’re mostly reliant on the connected devices’ navigation and music streaming services rather than the in-built ones.

Smarter performance?

While the #3 is built on the same Sustainable Experience Architecture (SEA) platform as the #1, Smart claims that it has tweaked the suspension to be sportier.

Compared to the #1, the #3 is more composed around the corners which is also due to the wider track and a slightly lowered height. However, I would not want to call the #3 a sprightly car around the corners as the electrically adjustable steering wheel feels rather vague even with Sport mode turned on.

Just like the #1 Premium, the #3 Premium is powered by a single rear-mounted (RWD) electric motor that makes 272 PS and 343 Nm. In our 0-100 km/h test, the #3 Premium completed the sprint in 5.6 seconds which is 0.3 seconds quicker than the #1 Premium.

In terms of acceleration and power, the #3 Premium feels the same as its more practical stablemate. Aside from a slightly more capable cornering prowess, the #3 rides the same as the #1 – quiet, pliant, and rather refined on the highways.

But you would not want to drive it for too long because the #3’s regenerative braking is intrusive and unnatural. Each time you start the #3, the regenerative braking is at ‘Medium’ mode by default.

The regen braking is rather tiresome and doesn’t want to coast, rather it brakes at the soonest, leaving those inside to feel very queasy quickly.

Thankfully, it seems that Smart has rectified the issue of the cumbersome regenerative brake setting as putting it in ‘Low’ makes the brakes a lot easier to modulate.

The #3 also introduces a single-pedal (s-Pedal) mode for those who prefer that feature but a warning would pop up on the screen which can only be closed after a 5-second countdown. We tried it for a while but just like ‘Normal’ regenerative braking, it gets very tiring and we switched it off after.

As for safety features, the #3 Premium is offered with most of the ADAS suite that is already available on the #1 like Highway Assist (HWA), Traffic Jam Assist (TJA), Autonomous Emergency Brake, and Front Collision Mitigation.

Via a 175 kW DC fast charger, it took 15 minutes to charge the #3 from 54% to 80% state of charge (SoC). In order to adjust the maximum charging capacity level of the BEV, you could only do so via the Hello Smart app as the feature is not available in the vehicle’s setting.

After around 100 km of mileage in a mix of 60% highway and 40% city/stop-start traffic, we recorded 18.8 kWh/100 km. That is within the energy consumption figures we recorded during our review of the Smart #1 Premium.

Conclusion – All grown up?

Earlier in this review, I called the Smart #3 a more mature model compared to the Smart #1 but these two aren’t exactly opposing sides of the same coin. Aside from a few differences in driving dynamics and practicality space, both the pair of Smart BEVs are fashionably chic in design with apparent flaws in infotainment usability.

Popular consensus might prefer the #3 over its bold and sleek design over the safe but still characterful #1. Even in terms of price, some might consider the #3 Premium which is RM 4,000 more than the #1 Premium.

With a difference of RM 4,000 between the two nearly similar cars, the answer to which is the better choice is hard to place – dynamism or practicality? Some might enjoy a little bit more pep in their daily to which it is hard to ignore the #3 but some might prefer a better use of space which the #1 easily delivers.

For now, I would say the Smart #3 adds some performance funkiness into a crowd of otherwise similarly sleek and fast-accelerating BEVs. That might be the biggest setback for Smart though - pulling a little bit of pizzazz while playing safe rather than immediately standing out.