Volkswagen Polo 2001 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.1 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 65 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 112 NM | 100 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.9 seconds | 13.4 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 10 HP less power than Mitsubishi Colt, but torque is 12 NM more than Mitsubishi Colt. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Polo could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi Colt gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.90 m | 3.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.65 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.55 m | |
| Volkswagen Polo is 3 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Colt, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 270 litres | 500 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1030 litres | 760 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Volkswagen Polo has 230 litres less trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. This could mean that the Volkswagen Polo uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Polo (by 270 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`550 | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Polo has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |