Volkswagen Polo 1999 vs Volkswagen Lupo 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.7 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 64 HP | 60 HP | |
| Torque: | 124 NM | 115 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.8 seconds | 16.8 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 4 HP more power than Volkswagen Lupo, whereas torque is 9 NM more than Volkswagen Lupo. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.7 | 4.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 4.8 l/100km | 4.7 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Lupo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Lupo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Polo could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Lupo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 34 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 950 km in combined cycle | 770 km in combined cycle | |
| 1180 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 930 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Polo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 700'000 km | 560'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volkswagen Polo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi 80, Seat Toledo, Skoda Felicia | Used also on Seat Arosa | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Polo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volkswagen Lupo 1998 1.7 engine: The engine is not very powerful or dynamic, but it is robust. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.74 m | 3.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.63 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.46 m | |
| Volkswagen Polo is 21 cm longer than the Volkswagen Lupo, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 245 litres | 130 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
975 litres | 860 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Polo has more luggage capacity. Volkswagen Polo has 115 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Lupo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Polo (by 115 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo is 0.3 metres more than that of the Volkswagen Lupo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`400 | 1`430 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Volkswagen Lupo has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Lupo quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Volkswagen Lupo has
| |