Volkswagen Golf 2002 vs Ford Focus 2001
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 235 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.9 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Golf is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Golf engine produces 65 HP more power than Ford Focus, whereas torque is 75 NM more than Ford Focus. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Golf reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.0 l/100km | 8.4 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Focus is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Golf consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Golf could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Golf consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Focus. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 650 km with real consumption | ||
| Ford Focus gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Skoda Octavia, Audi A3, Seat Leon, Seat Toledo, Audi TT | Used only for this car | |
| 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: | yes | no | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.15 m | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.43 m | |
| Volkswagen Golf is 23 cm shorter than the Ford Focus, 4 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Golf is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 490 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`655 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | high | below average | |
| Volkswagen Golf has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Focus has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Volkswagen Golf, so Volkswagen Golf quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.3/10 | 7.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Golf has
|
Ford Focus has
| |