Seat Cordoba 1996 vs Volkswagen Polo 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 64 HP | |
| Torque: | 202 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 16.9 seconds | |
|
Seat Cordoba is more dynamic to drive. Seat Cordoba engine produces 26 HP more power than Volkswagen Polo, whereas torque is 77 NM more than Volkswagen Polo. Thanks to more power Seat Cordoba reaches 100 km/h speed 4.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.9 | 5.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.2 l/100km | 4.9 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Seat Cordoba consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo, which means that by driving the Seat Cordoba over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Seat Cordoba consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 1090 km on highway | 1120 km on highway | ||
| 860 km with real consumption | 910 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 600'000 km | 700'000 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: | 5 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Audi A4, Volkswagen Sharan, Volkswagen Polo, Seat Toledo | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi 80, Seat Toledo, Skoda Felicia | |
| 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 | 762 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`500 | |
| 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
| |