Volkswagen Polo 1995 vs Ford KA 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.3 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: | 60 HP | 60 HP | |
| Torque: | 116 NM | 105 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.9 seconds | 15.4 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Polo and Ford KA have the same engine power, but Volkswagen Polo torque is 11 NM more than Ford KA. Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford KA, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Polo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford KA. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 42 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 760 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Polo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 320'000 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: | 4 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Vento | Used also on Ford Fiesta | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volkswagen Polo 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: | 3.72 m | 3.62 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.63 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.37 m | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is larger. Volkswagen Polo is 10 cm longer than the Ford KA, 3 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 245 litres | 186 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
975 litres | 724 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Polo has more luggage capacity. Volkswagen Polo has 59 litres more trunk space than the Ford KA. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Polo (by 251 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.1 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo is 0.3 metres more than that of the Ford KA. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`400 | 1`265 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | high | low | |
| Volkswagen Polo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford KA has serious deffects in 105 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Polo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Ford KA has
| |