Volkswagen Polo 2014 vs Honda Jazz 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Diesel | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Volkswagen Polo) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Honda Jazz) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 123 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.9 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Honda Jazz is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 27 HP less power than Honda Jazz, but torque is 87 NM more than Honda Jazz. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.4 | 5.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 4.8 l/100km | 5.6 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda Jazz, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Polo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 240 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda Jazz. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 40 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1320 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1450 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 930 km with real consumption | 710 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Polo gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 145 mm (5.7 inches) | 110 mm (4.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volkswagen Polo can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Volkswagen Polo version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.97 m | 4.00 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.55 m | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is smaller. Volkswagen Polo is 2 cm shorter than the Honda Jazz, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 280 litres | 354 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
952 litres | 1314 litres | |
|
Honda Jazz has more luggage space. Volkswagen Polo has 74 litres less trunk space than the Honda Jazz. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda Jazz (by 362 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo is 0.2 metres less than that of the Honda Jazz. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`650 | 1`605 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Honda Jazz scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Honda Jazz has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Polo has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Honda Jazz, so Honda Jazz quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5800 | 9600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Honda Jazz has
| |