Volkswagen Polo 1997 vs Peugeot 306 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 64 HP | 70 HP | |
| Torque: | 124 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16.9 seconds | 17.9 seconds | |
| Volkswagen Polo engine produces 6 HP less power than Peugeot 306, whereas torque is 1 NM less than Peugeot 306. Despite less power, Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 4.9 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 306, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Polo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 165 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Polo consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 306. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 880 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 1090 km on highway | 1200 km on highway | ||
| 910 km with real consumption | 960 km with real consumption | ||
| Peugeot 306 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 700'000 km | 560'000 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: | 14 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi 80, Seat Toledo, Skoda Felicia | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Toyota Corolla, Peugeot 206, Citroen Berlingo | |
| 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: | 1.43 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is smaller, but slightly higher. Volkswagen Polo is 20 cm shorter than the Peugeot 306, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 390 litres | 440 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1250 litres | 1512 litres | |
|
Peugeot 306 has more luggage space. Volkswagen Polo has 50 litres less trunk space than the Peugeot 306. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Peugeot 306 (by 262 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 1`620 kg | 1`625 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`160 kg | 1`140 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 460 kg | 485 kg | |
| 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 (€): | 1000 | 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Peugeot 306 has
| |