Mitsubishi Colt VI (CJO) or Volkswagen Polo IV (9N)?
1996–2003 vs 2001–2009 · Hatchback 3-door/Hatchback 5-door vs Hatchback 5-door/Hatchback 3-door
In short
- Length: Colt VI (CJO) 3,880 mm, Polo IV (9N) 3,916 mm — a 4 cm difference.
- Boot: Colt VI (CJO) 240 l, Polo IV (9N) 270 l.
- Lowest consumption: Colt VI (CJO) 6.6 l/100 km, Polo IV (9N) 4.5 l/100 km.
- Power: Colt VI (CJO) 55–90 kW, Polo IV (9N) 40–110 kW.
- Standard equipment: Colt VI (CJO) 18 items (GL), Polo IV (9N) 17 items (Trendline).
- On Autodrom: Polo IV (9N) from €7,000 (1 listing); no Colt VI (CJO) is listed right now.
Volkswagen Polo IV (9N)2001–2009 · 10 engines · Trendline, Comfortline, Highline, SportlineSpecifications →1 listing from €7,000 →
better value
Mitsubishi Colt VI (CJO)
1996–2003
Volkswagen Polo IV (9N)
2001–2009
Frequently asked questions
Which is bigger — Mitsubishi Colt VI (CJO) or Volkswagen Polo IV (9N)?
Length: Volkswagen Polo IV (9N) 3,916 mm, Mitsubishi Colt VI (CJO) 3,880 mm (a 36 mm difference). Wheelbase: 2,460 vs 2,415 mm. Boot: 270 vs 240 l.
Which uses less fuel — Mitsubishi Colt VI (CJO) or Volkswagen Polo IV (9N)?
The most frugal Mitsubishi Colt VI (CJO) uses 6.6 l/100 km (1.3 12V); the most frugal Volkswagen Polo IV (9N) 4.5 l/100 km (1.4 TDI 80).
Which is more powerful — Mitsubishi Colt VI (CJO) or Volkswagen Polo IV (9N)?
The strongest Mitsubishi Colt VI (CJO) makes 90 kW (122 hp) (1.8 GDI); the strongest Volkswagen Polo IV (9N) 110 kW (150 hp) (1.8 T GTI).