Volkswagen Passat 1999 vs Volkswagen Sharan 1997
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Minivan / MPV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 285 NM | 235 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 19.1 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Passat engine produces 5 HP more power than Volkswagen Sharan, whereas torque is 50 NM more than Volkswagen Sharan. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Passat reaches 100 km/h speed 6.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Passat is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Passat consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Sharan, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Passat over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Passat consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Sharan. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 890 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 1170 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Sharan gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 560'000 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 Sharan engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 3 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi A6, Audi A4, Volkswagen Bora | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A6, Seat Alhambra, Seat Leon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Sharan might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volkswagen Passat 1999 1.9 engine: The engine is very demanding when it comes to oil quality and using poor quality lubricants will significantly reduce engine life. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.62 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.73 m | |
| Volkswagen Passat is 5 cm longer than the Volkswagen Sharan, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Passat is 23 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 495 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Passat is 0.7 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Sharan, which means Volkswagen Passat can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`980 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | low | |
| Volkswagen Passat has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Sharan has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volkswagen Passat, so Volkswagen Passat quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.3/10 | 7.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Passat has
|
Volkswagen Sharan has
| |