Volkswagen Polo 1996 vs Chrysler Neon 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 60 HP | 133 HP | |
| Torque: | 116 NM | 177 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 16 seconds | 12.8 seconds | |
|
Chrysler Neon is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 73 HP less power than Chrysler Neon, whereas torque is 61 NM less than Chrysler Neon. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 3.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 8.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 10.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 2.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Neon, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Polo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 315 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Polo consumes 3.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Neon. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 530 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km on highway | 670 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 440 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 380'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Vento | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chrysler Stratus, Dodge Neon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chrysler Neon might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.14 m | 4.39 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is smaller. Volkswagen Polo is 25 cm shorter than the Chrysler Neon, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 455 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
760 litres | no data | |
|
Volkswagen Polo has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Chrysler Neon may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo is 0.1 metres more than that of the Chrysler Neon. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`455 kg | 1`600 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Chrysler Neon has
| |