Suzuki Baleno 1995 vs Volkswagen Bora 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 96 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 134 NM | 205 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.2 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Bora is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki Baleno engine produces 54 HP less power than Volkswagen Bora, whereas torque is 71 NM less than Volkswagen Bora. Due to the lower power, Suzuki Baleno reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 10.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Baleno is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki Baleno consumes 2.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Bora, which means that by driving the Suzuki Baleno over 15,000 km in a year you can save 375 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki Baleno consumes 2.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Bora. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 51 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 820 km on highway | 770 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Suzuki Baleno gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Volkswagen Bora 1998: Vehicle is equipped with 4motion automatic four-wheel drive. Under normal driving conditions, the torque distribution is 90% to the front axle and 10% to the rear axle. When wheel spin is detected, the multi-plate clutch engages and torque is evenly distributed between the axles (50%/50%). | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Vitara | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Suzuki Baleno might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Bora 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: | 4.38 m | 4.41 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Suzuki Baleno is smaller. Suzuki Baleno is 3 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Bora, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Suzuki Baleno is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 375 litres | 360 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1370 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Suzuki Baleno has 15 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Bora. The Volkswagen Bora may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Baleno is 1.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Bora, which means Suzuki Baleno can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`200 | 1`965 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.0/10 | 8.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Baleno has
|
Volkswagen Bora has
| |