Volkswagen Polo 1996 vs Volkswagen Polo 2001
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 135 NM | 126 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 15.3 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Polo 1996 is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Polo 1996 and Volkswagen Polo 2001 have the same engine power, but Volkswagen Polo 1996 torque is 9 NM more than Volkswagen Polo 2001. Volkswagen Polo 1996 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.6 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo 2001 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Polo 1996 consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo 2001, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Polo 1996 could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Polo 1996 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo 2001. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 520 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| 660 km on highway | 770 km on highway | ||
| 520 km with real consumption | 550 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Polo 2001 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 460'000 km | 370'000 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 1996 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Seat Ibiza, Seat Cordoba | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Skoda Fabia, Audi A2 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Polo 2001 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volkswagen Polo 2001 1.4 engine: Engine is known for its simplicity, compact design, and overall reliability. Many complaints from owners are related to power loss or fluctuating idle, often caused by issues with the throttle body, EGR valve, or air leaks ... More about Volkswagen Polo 2001 1.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.72 m | 3.90 m | |
| Width: | 1.66 m | 1.65 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.46 m | |
| Volkswagen Polo 1996 is 18 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Polo 2001, 1 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Polo 1996 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 245 litres | 245 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
975 litres | 975 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.1 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo 1996 is 0.5 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Polo 2001, which means Volkswagen Polo 1996 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`490 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | Volkswagen Polo 2001 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Polo 1996 has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo 2001, so Volkswagen Polo 2001 quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |