Chrysler Neon 1997 vs Volkswagen Polo 1996
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 133 HP | 60 HP | |
| Torque: | 174 NM | 116 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 seconds | 16 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Neon is more dynamic to drive. Chrysler Neon engine produces 73 HP more power than Volkswagen Polo, whereas torque is 58 NM more than Volkswagen Polo. Thanks to more power Chrysler Neon reaches 100 km/h speed 6.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.2 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Chrysler Neon consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chrysler Neon could require 270 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chrysler Neon consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 550 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 710 km on highway | 830 km on highway | ||
| 510 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Polo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chrysler Stratus, Dodge Neon | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Vento | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chrysler Neon might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.36 m | 4.14 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Chrysler Neon is larger, but slightly lower. Chrysler Neon is 22 cm longer than the Volkswagen Polo, 7 cm wider, while the height of Chrysler Neon is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 364 litres | 455 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 760 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Polo has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Chrysler Neon has 91 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Polo. This could mean that the Chrysler Neon uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler Neon is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 1`455 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 600 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Neon has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |