Suzuki Swift 2017 vs Volkswagen Polo 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.4 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Suzuki Swift) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Volkswagen Polo) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 120 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki Swift and Volkswagen Polo have the same engine power, but Suzuki Swift torque is 110 NM less than Volkswagen Polo. Suzuki Swift reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.3 | 3.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.2 l/100km | 4.9 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki Swift 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 Suzuki Swift could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki Swift consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 37 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 860 km in combined cycle | 1320 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1450 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 910 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. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 115 mm (4.5 inches) | 145 mm (5.7 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volkswagen Polo can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Volkswagen Polo version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.84 m | 3.97 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.45 m | |
| Suzuki Swift is 13 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Polo, 5 cm wider, while the height of Suzuki Swift is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 265 litres | 280 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
947 litres | 952 litres | |
| Suzuki Swift has 15 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Polo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Polo (by 5 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Swift is 1 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Polo, which means Suzuki Swift can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`365 | 1`670 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volkswagen Polo scores higher in safety tests. The Volkswagen Polo scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Volkswagen Polo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Suzuki Swift has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Polo quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 13 000 | 5800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Swift has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |