Volkswagen Polo 2005 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Diesel | 1.3 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 80 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 195 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.8 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 15 HP less power than Mitsubishi Colt, but torque is 70 NM more than Mitsubishi Colt. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.4 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 4.8 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Polo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Polo consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1020 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 1150 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 930 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Polo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.92 m | 3.94 m | |
| Width: | 1.65 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is smaller. Volkswagen Polo is 2 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Colt, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 270 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1030 litres | 1032 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Volkswagen Polo has 50 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. The Mitsubishi Colt may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Colt (by 2 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. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`650 | 1`460 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Polo has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |