1996 Mitsubishi Colt vs. 2010 Volkswagen Polo
To start off, 2010 Volkswagen Polo is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mitsubishi Colt. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mitsubishi Colt would be higher. At 1,299 cc (4 cylinders), 1996 Mitsubishi Colt is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Mitsubishi Colt (74 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 5 more horse power than 2010 Volkswagen Polo. (69 HP @ 5400 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 1996 Mitsubishi Colt should accelerate faster than 2010 Volkswagen Polo. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Volkswagen Polo weights approximately 122 kg more than 1996 Mitsubishi Colt.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2010 Volkswagen Polo (112 Nm @ 3000 RPM) has 4 more torque (in Nm) than 1996 Mitsubishi Colt. (108 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2010 Volkswagen Polo will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1996 Mitsubishi Colt.
Compare all specifications:
1996 Mitsubishi Colt | 2010 Volkswagen Polo | |
Make | Mitsubishi | Volkswagen |
Model | Colt | Polo |
Year Released | 1996 | 2010 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1299 cc | 1200 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 74 HP | 69 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 5400 RPM |
Torque | 108 Nm | 112 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Vehicle Weight | 945 kg | 1067 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3890 mm | 3970 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1690 mm | 1682 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1370 mm | 1462 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2430 mm | 2470 mm |