Subaru Impreza 2008 vs Volkswagen Golf 2009
| Body: | Sedan | Estate car / wagon | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The wagon generally has more cargo space due to a larger trunk door opening, a roof that extends as far back as possible, and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into cargo space. Sedans tend to be quieter than wagons due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.4 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: | 107 HP | 122 HP | |
| Torque: | 142 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Golf is a more dynamic driving. Subaru Impreza engine produces 15 HP less power than Volkswagen Golf, whereas torque is 58 NM less than Volkswagen Golf. Due to the lower power, Subaru Impreza reaches 100 km/h speed 5.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 6.0 | |
|
The Volkswagen Golf is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Subaru Impreza consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Subaru Impreza could require 225 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 1070 km on highway | ||
| Volkswagen Golf gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Skoda Yeti | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Golf might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Golf 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. | |||
| Volkswagen Golf 2009 1.4 engine: The engine is prone to increased vibration at idle. The engine is also very demanding on fuel quality. The timing chain has a low life expectancy and must be monitored. Turbine problems are also common. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.58 m | 4.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.50 m | |
| Subaru Impreza is 5 cm longer than the Volkswagen Golf, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Impreza is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1495 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Impreza is 0.1 metres more than that of the Volkswagen Golf. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`970 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volkswagen Golf scores higher in safety tests. The Volkswagen Golf scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 4400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Impreza has
|
Volkswagen Golf has
| |