HomeArticlesProductsKeywordsCompanies

Compare SEAT Leon 4 vs Volkswagen Golf 8 vs Lexus CT 200h

Variants
1.0 eTSI DSG
1.0 TSI 110
1.0 TSI 90
1.4 e-HYBRID DSG
1.5 eTSI DSG
1.5 TGI
1.5 TGI DSG
1.5 TSI 130
1.5 TSI 150
2.0 TDI 115
2.0 TDI 150 DSG
2.0 TSI DSG
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
Euro6
Euro5

Capacity

Cargo Capacity
375 L / 13.2 cu-ft ~ 985 L / 34.8 cu-ft
Coolant Capacity
6.9 L / 7.3 qt
Engine Oil Capacity
4.2 L / 4.4 qt
Fuel Capacity
45.0 L / 11.9 gal
Passengers
5
5
5

Chassis

Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Disc
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Semi-independent, Torsion beam
Double-wishbone
Turning Circle
10.5 m / 34.4 ft
10.9 m / 35.8 ft
10.4 m / 34.1 ft

Construction

Battery | Capacity
12.8 kWh (gross)
Body Style
5-door hybrid Hatchback

Dimensions

Ground Clearance
130 mm / 5.1 in
Size | Length
4368 mm / 172.0 in
Size | Width
1765 mm / 69.5 in
Track Width | Front
1525.0 mm / 60.0 in
Track Width | Rear
1516.0 mm / 59.7 in
1520.0 mm / 59.8 in
Wheelbase
2600 mm / 102.4 in

Performance

Acceleration | 0 - 100 km/h
10.3 sec
Acceleration | 0 - 60 mph
9.8 sec
Coefficient Of Drag
0.275
0.29
Electric Range
58.0 km / 36.0 mi
Top Speed
180.0 km/h / 111.8 mph

Powertrain

Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Engine
2ZR-FXE
Engine | Bore
80.5 mm / 3.2 in
Engine | Compression Ratio
13.0:1
Engine | Displacement
1.8 L / 109.7 cu-in / 1798.0 cc
Engine | Power
99.0 hp / 73.8 kW @ 5200 rpm + 82.0 hp / 61.1 kW (electric motor)
Engine | Specific Output
55.1 hp/L / 0.9 hp/cu-in
Engine | Stroke
88.3 mm / 3.5 in

Production

Availability
2020

Reviews

Neofiliac score
17%
70%
31%
Pros
  • Low official fuel consumption
  • Less ugly than before
  • Rather good styling
  • Good 0.27 drag coefficient
  • Low fuel consumption
  • Good handlding characteristics
  • Good 0.28 drag coefficient
  • Low official fuel consumption
  • Small turning circle
Cons
  • Poorly built
  • Only available with small engines
  • No independent rear suspensions
  • Only available with small engines
  • Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
  • Horrible 0-100kph time
  • Can't even reach 200km/h
  • Miserably low engine output
  • Poor handling

Price

Offers (incl. referral links)
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.