Volkswagen Polo 2009 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.1 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 60 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 108 NM | 100 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.1 seconds | 13.2 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 15 HP less power than Mitsubishi Colt, but torque is 8 NM more than Mitsubishi Colt. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 5.5 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 770 km with real consumption | ||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.97 m | 3.94 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.55 m | |
| Volkswagen Polo is 3 cm longer than the Mitsubishi Colt, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 280 litres | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
952 litres | 1032 litres | |
| Volkswagen Polo has 60 litres more trunk space than the Mitsubishi Colt. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mitsubishi Colt (by 80 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`550 | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Polo has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |