Chevrolet Camaro 1998 vs Volkswagen Golf 1998
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.8 Petrol | 1.9 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 193 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 305 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 13.3 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Camaro is more dynamic to drive. Chevrolet Camaro engine produces 103 HP more power than Volkswagen Golf, whereas torque is 95 NM more than Volkswagen Golf. Thanks to more power Chevrolet Camaro reaches 100 km/h speed 4.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.4 | 5.2 | |
|
The Volkswagen Golf is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chevrolet Camaro consumes 7.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Camaro could require 1080 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 59 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 470 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 610 km on highway | 1300 km on highway | ||
| Volkswagen Golf gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volkswagen Golf) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Chevrolet Camaro) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.91 m | 4.08 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.30 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Chevrolet Camaro is larger, but lower. Chevrolet Camaro is 83 cm longer than the Volkswagen Golf, 18 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Camaro is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 270 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 448 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Camaro is 0.9 metres more than that of the Volkswagen Golf, which means Chevrolet Camaro can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`640 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Camaro has
|
Volkswagen Golf has
| |