Mitsubishi Colt 1996 vs Volkswagen Golf 1992
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 108 NM | 128 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 13.8 seconds | |
| Mitsubishi Colt and Volkswagen Golf have the same engine power, but Mitsubishi Colt torque is 20 NM less than Volkswagen Golf. Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 6.9 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Golf gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 440'000 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 Golf engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 27 years | 2 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi Lancer | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volkswagen Vento, Seat Ibiza | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Golf engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 4.02 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.36 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is smaller. Mitsubishi Colt is 14 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Golf, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 240 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
830 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.7 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Golf, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`445 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Golf has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Volkswagen Golf has
| |