Compare Volkswagen Golf 8 vs Chevrolet Cruze 2 Hatchback vs Chevrolet Volt 2
Variants
1.0 eTSI 110 DSG
1.0 TSI 110
1.0 TSI 90
1.4 TSI 204 eHybrid DSG
1.5 eTSI 130 DSG
1.5 eTSI 150 DSG
1.5 TGI 130 DSG
1.5 TSI 130
1.5 TSI 150
2.0 TDI 115
2.0 TDI 150
2.0 TDI 150 DSG
GTD DSG
GTE DSG
GTI
GTI Clubsport DSG
GTI DSG
R 4MOTION DSG
1.4
1.4 AT
1.4 Turbo AT
1.6 TD
1.6 TD AT
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
301 L / 10.6 cu-ft
Coolant Capacity
7.0 L / 7.4 qt
Engine Oil Capacity
4.0 L / 4.2 qt
Fuel Capacity
33.7 L / 8.9 gal
Passengers
5
5
5
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Ventilated discs
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Semi-dependent beam with stabilizer lateral stability, Trailing arm, Coil spring
Semi-independent, Torsion
Tire Size
215/50 R17
Turning Circle
10.9 m / 35.8 ft
11.8 m / 38.7 ft
11.1 m / 36.4 ft
Construction
Battery | Capacity
18.4 kWh (gross)
Body Style
5-door Hatchback
5-door plug-in hybrid Hatchback
Dimensions
Size | Height
1432 mm / 56.4 in
Size | Length
4453 mm / 175.3 in
4582 mm / 180.4 in
Size | Width
1791 mm / 70.5 in
1809 mm / 71.2 in
Track Width | Front
1540.0 mm / 60.6 in
Track Width | Rear
1552.0 mm / 61.1 in
1570.0 mm / 61.8 in
Weight
1607.0 kg / 3542.8 lbs
Wheel Size
7.0J x 17
Wheelbase
2700 mm / 106.3 in
2694 mm / 106.1 in
Performance
Coefficient Of Drag
0.275
Fuel Economy
5.6 L/100km / 42.0 MPG (urban)
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Engine | Bore
74.0 mm / 2.9 in
Engine | Compression Ratio
12.5:1
Engine | Displacement
1.5 L / 90.9 cu-in / 1490.0 cc
Engine | Power
101.0 hp / 75.3 kW @ 5600 rpm + 149.0 hp / 111.1 kW (electric motor)
Engine | Redline
5600 rpm
Engine | Specific Output
67.8 hp/L / 1.1 hp/cu-in
Engine | Stroke
86.6 mm / 3.4 in
Engine | Type
direct-injected petrol inline-4 DOHC engine with 4 values per cylinder
Transmission | Type
Multi-mode electric
Production
Availability
2020
2017 ~ 2018
2016 ~ 2019
Reviews
Neofiliac score
70%
20%
26%
Pros
- Rather good styling
- Good 0.27 drag coefficient
- Low fuel consumption
- Good handlding characteristics
- Slightly improved styling
- Good fuel economy ratings
- Longer range than Mk1
Cons
- Only available with small engines
- Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
- No powerful engine options
- Only available with small engines
- No independent rear suspensions
- Miserably low engine output
- Only available with tiny engines
- No independent rear suspensions
- Low cargo capacity
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.