Volkswagen Polo 1999 vs Volkswagen Passat 2008
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 126 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 47 HP less power than Volkswagen Passat, whereas torque is 74 NM less than Volkswagen Passat. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.2 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Polo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 1060 km in combined cycle | |
| 930 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 950 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Passat gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Skoda Fabia, Audi A2 | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Skoda Yeti | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Passat might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.74 m | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.63 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is smaller. Volkswagen Polo is 103 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Passat, 19 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 245 litres | 565 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
975 litres | no data | |
|
Volkswagen Passat has more luggage space. Volkswagen Polo has 320 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo is 1 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Passat, which means Volkswagen Polo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`400 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | Volkswagen Passat has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Polo has serious deffects in 290 percent more cases than Volkswagen Passat, so Volkswagen Passat quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Volkswagen Passat has
| |