Volkswagen Polo 1997 vs Suzuki Baleno 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 96 HP | |
| Torque: | 135 NM | 134 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.3 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Volkswagen Polo engine produces 21 HP less power than Suzuki Baleno, but torque is 1 NM more than Suzuki Baleno. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 7.9 | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Baleno, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Polo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 640 km in combined cycle | |
| 780 km on highway | 790 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Seat Ibiza, Seat Cordoba | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Vitara | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| 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 | 4.38 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is smaller. Volkswagen Polo is 24 cm shorter than the Suzuki Baleno, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 390 litres | 375 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1250 litres | 1377 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Volkswagen Polo has 15 litres more trunk space than the Suzuki Baleno. The Suzuki Baleno may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Suzuki Baleno (by 127 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`515 | 1`590 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Suzuki Baleno has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Polo has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Suzuki Baleno, so Suzuki Baleno quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.0/10 | 7.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Suzuki Baleno has
| |