Peugeot 306 1999 vs Volkswagen Polo 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 135 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15 seconds | 13.3 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is a more dynamic driving. Peugeot 306 engine produces 10 HP less power than Volkswagen Polo, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Volkswagen Polo. Due to the lower power, Peugeot 306 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 8.6 | |
|
The Peugeot 306 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Peugeot 306 consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo, which means that by driving the Peugeot 306 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 520 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 670 km on highway | ||
| Peugeot 306 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 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 Polo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Citroen Xsara, Peugeot 206, Citroen Xsara Picasso, Peugeot 106 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Seat Ibiza, Seat Toledo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Polo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Polo 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. | |||
| Volkswagen Polo 2000 1.6 engine: This is a simple and reliable engine with an impressive lifespan when properly maintained. However, many of its issues stem from air leaks, so checking hoses and the intake manifold is essential. The ignition ... More about Volkswagen Polo 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.34 m | 4.14 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Peugeot 306 is larger, but lower. Peugeot 306 is 20 cm longer than the Volkswagen Polo, 4 cm wider, while the height of Peugeot 306 is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 440 litres | 390 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1250 litres | |
|
Peugeot 306 has more luggage capacity. Peugeot 306 has 50 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 1`550 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Volkswagen Polo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Peugeot 306 has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Polo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Peugeot 306 has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |