Volkswagen Polo 2009 vs Citroen C3 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 70 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 160 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 16 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 20 HP more power than Citroen C3, whereas torque is 70 NM more than Citroen C3. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 4.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 | 4.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 4.9 l/100km | 5.2 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Polo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1070 km in combined cycle | 1130 km in combined cycle | |
| 1250 km on highway | 1310 km on highway | ||
| 910 km with real consumption | 960 km with real consumption | ||
| Citroen C3 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: | 350'000 km | 400'000 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 Citroen C3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi A3, Skoda Fabia, Skoda Roomster | Used only for this car | |
| 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. | |||
| Volkswagen Polo 2009 1.6 engine: The 1.6 TDI turbo diesel engine is generally reliable, which is especially reassuring given its frequent use in commercial vehicles. Even under heavy use, it can exceed 500,000 km, provided that maintenance is performed regularly and ... More about Volkswagen Polo 2009 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.97 m | 3.94 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.52 m | |
| Volkswagen Polo is 3 cm longer than the Citroen C3, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 280 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1000 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Volkswagen Polo has 20 litres less trunk space than the Citroen C3. This could mean that the Volkswagen Polo uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo is 0.4 metres more than that of the Citroen C3, which means Volkswagen Polo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`650 | 1`564 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Volkswagen Polo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Citroen C3 has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Polo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Citroen C3 has
| |