Volkswagen Beetle 2013 vs Volkswagen Polo 2009
| Body: | Cabrio | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 195 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 14 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Beetle is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Beetle engine produces 65 HP more power than Volkswagen Polo, whereas torque is 125 NM more than Volkswagen Polo. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Beetle reaches 100 km/h speed 4.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 4.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.1 l/100km | 4.7 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Beetle consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Beetle could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Beetle consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1070 km in combined cycle | 1070 km in combined cycle | |
| 1240 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 950 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 km | 350'000 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 Beetle engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 12 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Sharan, Audi A3 | Used also on Skoda Fabia | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Beetle might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volkswagen Beetle 2013 2.0 engine: The engine is very durable and can last a long time with proper maintenance, and is also quite economical for its power. There may be some problems with the turbine geometry. It is important to use good ... More about Volkswagen Beetle 2013 2.0 engine Volkswagen Polo 2009 1.6 engine: The 1.6 TDI turbo diesel engine is generally reliable, which is especially reassuring given its frequent use in commercial vehicles. Even under heavy use, it can exceed 500,000 km, provided that maintenance is performed regularly and ... More about Volkswagen Polo 2009 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.28 m | 3.97 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.49 m | |
|
Volkswagen Beetle is larger, but slightly lower. Volkswagen Beetle is 31 cm longer than the Volkswagen Polo, 13 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Beetle is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 225 litres | 280 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 952 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Polo has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volkswagen Beetle has 55 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Polo. This could mean that the Volkswagen Beetle uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`870 | 1`650 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Volkswagen Polo has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volkswagen Beetle, so Volkswagen Polo quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 200 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Beetle has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |