Volkswagen T-Roc I
Car comparison
Volkswagen T-Roc I 1.5 TSIvsVolkswagen Teramont 2.0 TSI
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolkswagen Teramont
2.0 TSI
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Volkswagen T-Roc I 1.5 TSI
- Quickest 0-100 km/h8.4 s
- Fastest top speed200 km/h124 mph
- Lightest1,445 kg3,186 lb
- Lowest combined fuel consumption6.4 L/100 km36.8 mpg US44.1 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption7.6 L/100 km30.9 mpg US37.2 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption5.7 L/100 km41.3 mpg US49.6 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions145 g/km
- Best estimated range859 km534 mi
- Best economy score90/100
Volkswagen Teramont 2.0 TSI
- Most powerful220 hp164 kW
- Highest torque350 Nm258 lb-ft
- Best power-to-weight107 hp/t80 kW/t9.4 kg/hp
- Best overall score58/100
- Best performance score43/100
- Best practicality score91/100
Specification comparison
| Model | VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 150hp112kW | 220hp164kW |
| Torque | 250Nm184lb-ft | 350Nm258lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,445kg3,186lb | 2,060kg4,542lb |
| Gross weight | 1,950kg4,299lb | 2,670kg5,886lb |
| Top speed | 200 km/h 124 mph | 190 km/h 118 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 73.8s99% target: 198 km/h / 123 mph Calculated | 82.9s99% target: 188 km/h / 117 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.4s | 8.6s |
| 0-60 mph | 7.9s Calculated | 8.1s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 6.4L/100 km36.8mpg US44.1mpg UK | 9.4L/100 km25mpg US30.1mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 7.6L/100 km30.9mpg US37.2mpg UK | 12L/100 km19.6mpg US23.5mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 5.7L/100 km41.3mpg US49.6mpg UK | 7.9L/100 km29.8mpg US35.8mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 16.1s Calculated | 16.3s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 104hp/t77kW/t47hp/1000 lb Calculated | 107hp/t80kW/t48hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 173Nm/t116lb-ft/ton Calculated | 170Nm/t114lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 859km534mi Calculated | 745km463mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,498cc91cu in | 1,984cc121cu in |
| Length | 4,234mm167in | 5,036mm198in |
| Width | 1,819mm72in | 1,989mm78in |
| Height | 1,573mm62in | 1,769mm70in |
| Wheelbase | 2,590mm102in | 2,979mm117in |
| Front track | 1,546mm61in | - |
| Rear track | 1,541mm61in | - |
| Ground clearance | 161mm6in | 203mm8in |
| Trunk volume | 445L | - |
| Max trunk volume | 1,290L | - |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 55L | 70L |
| CO2 emissions | 145g/km | 221g/km |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Dyno simulation
Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.
- Volkswagen T-Roc I 1.5 TSI: Power / Torque
- Volkswagen Teramont 2.0 TSI: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | - | 1,500-3,500 rpm | 3,750 rpm |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 4,400-6,200 rpm | 1,500-4,400 rpm | 6,450 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.9 s | 8.1 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.4 s | 8.6 s |
| Top speed | 200 km/h 124 mph | 190 km/h 118 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.6 s | 2.5 s |
330 ft 101 m | 7.0 s | 6.8 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.5 s | 10.4 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.6 s | 13.6 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 16.1 s | 16.3 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 141 km/h 88 mph | 135 km/h 84 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | 150 hp 112 kW |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 220 hp 164 kW |
Volkswagen Teramont 2.0 TSI has 70 hp more than Volkswagen T-Roc I 1.5 TSI.
The biggest power difference is between Volkswagen T-Roc I 1.5 TSI and Volkswagen Teramont 2.0 TSI: 70 hp (52 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | 250 Nm 184 lb-ft |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | 1,445 kg 3,186 lb |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 2,060 kg 4,542 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | 200 km/h 124 mph |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 190 km/h 118 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | 8.4 s |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 8.6 s |
Although Volkswagen Teramont 2.0 TSI has more power, Volkswagen T-Roc I 1.5 TSI is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volkswagen T-Roc I 1.5 TSI and Volkswagen Teramont 2.0 TSI: 0.2 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | 6.4 L/100 km 36.8 mpg US 44.1 mpg UK |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volkswagen T-Roc I 1.5 TSI and Volkswagen Teramont 2.0 TSI: 3.0 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | 104 hp/t 77 kW/t 9.6 kg/hp |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 107 hp/t 80 kW/t 9.4 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | 859 km 534 mi |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 745 km 463 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | 150 hp 112 kW | 8.4 s | 200 km/h 124 mph |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 220 hp 164 kW | 8.6 s | 190 km/h 118 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI |
| 6.4 L/100 km 36.8 mpg US 44.1 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI |
| 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | ||||||
Volkswagen T-Roc I 1.5 TSI is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.
Acceleration vs fuel consumption
Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | 6.4 L/100 km 36.8 mpg US 44.1 mpg UK | 8.4 s |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | 8.6 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | 104 hp/t 77 kW/t 9.6 kg/hp | 6.4 L/100 km 36.8 mpg US 44.1 mpg UK |
| VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | 107 hp/t 80 kW/t 9.4 kg/hp | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | VolkswagenT-Roc I1.5 TSI | VolkswagenTeramont2.0 TSI | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 150 hp 112 kW | 220 hp 164 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 250 Nm 184 lb-ft | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.4 s | 8.6 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 200 km/h 124 mph | 190 km/h 118 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,445 kg 3,186 lb | 2,060 kg 4,542 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 6.4 L/100 km 36.8 mpg US 44.1 mpg UK | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 859 km 534 mi | 745 km 463 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 145 g/km | 221 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 445 L 15.7 cu ft | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 104 hp/t 77 kW/t 9.6 kg/hp | 107 hp/t 80 kW/t 9.4 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | Volkswagen T-Roc I 1.5 TSI | Volkswagen Teramont 2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 6.4 L/100 km36.8 mpg US44.1 mpg UK | 9.4 L/100 km25 mpg US30.1 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 11.20 LC100 km | 16.45 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 18.02 LC100 mi | 26.47 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 960 L254 US gal211 UK gal | 1,410 L372 US gal310 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,680 LC/year | 2,468 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Volkswagen T-Roc I 1.5 TSI
- Is 615 kg lighter
- Is 0.2 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 10 km/h (6 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 3.0 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 115 km (71 mi) more estimated range
- Emits 76 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Lowest power
Volkswagen Teramont 2.0 TSI
- Has 70 hp more
- Has 100 Nm more
- Has 3 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
- Highest CO2 emissions
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























