Seat Cordoba 1996 vs Volkswagen Polo 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 101 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 140 NM | 135 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 13.3 seconds | |
|
Seat Cordoba is more dynamic to drive. Seat Cordoba engine produces 26 HP more power than Volkswagen Polo, whereas torque is 5 NM more than Volkswagen Polo. Thanks to more power Seat Cordoba reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Seat Cordoba consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Seat Cordoba could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Seat Cordoba consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 570 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 km on highway | 800 km on highway | ||
| 540 km with real consumption | 620 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Polo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 460'000 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: | 4 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Seat Toledo, Seat Ibiza | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Seat Ibiza, Seat Cordoba | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.14 m | 4.14 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.41 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Seat Cordoba and Volkswagen Polo are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 455 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 760 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Seat Cordoba is 0.9 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Polo, which means Seat Cordoba can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`000 | 1`485 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Volkswagen Polo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Seat Cordoba has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Polo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Seat Cordoba has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |