Runx 140rt Vs Polo 1.4i Hatch

[olorin]

Preliminary info:

RunX

Power: 71 k.W @ 6000 rpm.

Torque: 127 N.m. @ 4800 rpm.

Power/weight ratio: 62 W.kg (as per Car Magazine)

Mods: 17x7J rims; 215/40ZR17 tyres; 40mm drop.

Polo

Power: 60 k.W. @ 5000 rpm

Torque: 126 N.m. @ 3800 rpm

Power/weight ratio: 57 W.kg (as per Car Magazine)

Mods: None

All of the video footage was taken from the Polo, as it was assumed from the outset that the RunX was the quicker car. The voice you hear is that of Incubated, a member of the Car Today discussion forum (and others).

First run off the line: RunX launch: 8/10. Polo misses 3rd. RunX wins over short distance (@ about 110 kph-120 kph)

Second run off the line: RunX launch: 6/10. RunX wins by many car lengths @ about 150 kph-160 kph.

First roll-on: 4th gear. At low revs, the Polo's tractability beats that of the RunX. Traffic stopped the RunX from exploring its powerband unfortunately.

Second roll-on: 3rd gear. Once again, at low revs the Polo has the advantage, but if allowed to explore its powerband, the RunX catches and passes the Polo quite easily (as the Polo's gearing sees itself in fourth long before 140 kph).

Unfortunately, traffic stopped us from conducting further roll-on tests. Top-end tests were avoided as a precaution against discovering speed traps, cameras and lasers at 190 kph-200 kph.

Conclusion: The power/weight advantage of the RunX makes it a clear winner off the line. The tractability comparison is not as clear cut as I initially expected, since the gearing of both cars decided the winner at each starting speed. In other words, if it was a 4th gear roll-on at 90 kph, the Polo would jump ahead initially as it was already at the beginning of its powerband, while the RunX would actually only be in its powerband for 3rd gear at that speed, thus the necessary power/torque in fourth at that speed would be lacking.