Volkswagen Polo 2009 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2008
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.2 - 1.6 (petrol, diesel) | 1.1 - 1.5 (petrol) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 60 - 105 HP | 75 - 109 HP | |
| Torque: | 108 - 230 NM | 100 - 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 - 16.1 seconds | 10 - 13.2 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 - 5.9 | 5.5 - 6.2 | |
|
Volkswagen Polo petrol engines consumes on average 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mitsubishi Colt. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.97 m | 3.94 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.55 m | |
| Volkswagen Polo is 3 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Colt, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 280 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
952 litres | 1032 litres | |
| Volkswagen Polo has 60 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Colt (by 80 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`570 | ~ 1`457 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |