Kia RIO 2000 vs Volkswagen Bora 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 101 HP | |
| Torque: | 115 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.3 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Bora is a more dynamic driving. Kia RIO engine produces 26 HP less power than Volkswagen Bora, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Volkswagen Bora. Due to the lower power, Kia RIO reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.5 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Bora is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Kia RIO consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Bora, which means that by driving the Kia RIO over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Kia RIO consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Bora. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 520 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Bora gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volkswagen Bora engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Volkswagen Golf | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Bora might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volkswagen Bora 1998 1.6 engine: The most common issues with this engine are unstable idle and excessive vibrations. These problems are often resolved by cleaning the fuel injectors or the throttle body.
Another frequent source of trouble ... More about Volkswagen Bora 1998 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.22 m | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Kia RIO is smaller. Kia RIO is 16 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Bora, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Kia RIO is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 261 litres | 455 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 785 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Bora has more luggage space. Kia RIO has 194 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Bora. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.5 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia RIO is 1.5 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Bora, which means Kia RIO can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`409 kg | 1`720 kg | |
| Net weight: | 944 kg | 1`185 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 465 kg | 535 kg | |
| Kia RIO load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 15 procentiem less than Volkswagen Bora. Therefore, Volkswagen Bora is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia RIO has
|
Volkswagen Bora has
| |