Volkswagen Polo 2000 vs Peugeot 306 1999
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 135 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.3 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 10 HP more power than Peugeot 306, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Peugeot 306. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.6 | 7.8 | |
|
The Peugeot 306 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 306, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Polo could require 120 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 520 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 670 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| Peugeot 306 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 420'000 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: | 11 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Seat Toledo, Seat Ibiza | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Citroen Xsara, Peugeot 206, Citroen Xsara Picasso, Peugeot 106 | |
| 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: | 4.14 m | 4.34 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is smaller, but higher. Volkswagen Polo is 20 cm shorter than the Peugeot 306, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 390 litres | 440 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1250 litres | no data | |
|
Peugeot 306 has more luggage space. Volkswagen Polo has 50 litres less trunk space than the Peugeot 306. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`550 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Volkswagen Polo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Peugeot 306 has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Polo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Peugeot 306 has
| |