JAC E30X vs Volkswagen ID. Polo
Biggest differences: DC charging — JAC E30X 64 kW, Volkswagen ID. Polo 105 kW · Power — JAC E30X 136 PS, Volkswagen ID. Polo 211 PS · Boot — JAC E30X 310 l, Volkswagen ID. Polo 441 l.
JAC E30X
The JAC E30X is an electric hatchback in the B-segment, offering two battery options and corresponding ranges, all with the same powertrain output.
Volkswagen ID. Polo
The Volkswagen ID. Polo is an electric hatchback in the B-segment, offered with three powertrain configurations featuring different ranges and performance levels.
Profile against the market: JAC E30X vs Volkswagen ID. Polo
- JAC E30XNordic Edition 50
Volkswagen ID. Polo52 kWh 155 kW
JAC E30X or Volkswagen ID. Polo — who wins where
Volkswagen ID. Polo leads 8 to 1
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmVolkswagen ID. Polo +80 km
- Battery kWhVolkswagen ID. Polo +0.5 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmVolkswagen ID. Polo −2.3 kWh/100 km
- Power PSVolkswagen ID. Polo +75 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sVolkswagen ID. Polo −0.4 s
- Top speed km/hVolkswagen ID. Polo +10 km/h
- DC charging kWVolkswagen ID. Polo +41 kW
- AC charging kWNo difference
- Weight ↓ kgJAC E30X −131 kg
- Boot lVolkswagen ID. Polo +131 l
Technical data: JAC E30X vs Volkswagen ID. Polo
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | JAC E30X Nordic Edition 50 | Volkswagen ID. Polo 52 kWh 155 kW | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 374 km | 454 km | Volkswagen +80 km |
| Battery | 51.5 kWh | 52 kWh | Volkswagen +0.5 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 15.6 kWh/100 km | 13.3 kWh/100 km | Volkswagen −2.3 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 64 kW | 105 kW | Volkswagen +41 kW |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 11 kW | No difference |
| Charging ⚠ | 45 min 30–80% | 24 min 10–80% | 21 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 4.2 km/min | 13.2 km/min | Volkswagen +9 km/min |
| Voltage | — | 400 V | — |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 136 PS | 211 PS | Volkswagen +75 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 7.8 s | 7.4 s | Volkswagen −0.4 s |
| Top speed | 150 km/h | 160 km/h | Volkswagen +10 km/h |
| Drivetrain | FWD | FWD | — |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 1445 kg | 1576 kg | JAC −131 kg |
| Boot | 310 l | 441 l | Volkswagen +131 l |
| V2L (external power) | No | Yes | only Volkswagen |
| Length | 4025 mm | 4053 mm | Volkswagen +28 mm |
| Width | 1770 mm | 1816 mm | Volkswagen +46 mm |
| Height | 1560 mm | 1530 mm | JAC +30 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2620 mm | 2600 mm | JAC +20 mm |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
JAC E30X
Volkswagen ID. Polo
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
JAC E30X
Volkswagen ID. Polo
Other comparisons in this class: Hatchback, segment B
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — JAC E30X or Volkswagen ID. Polo?
The Volkswagen ID. Polo goes further: 454 km WLTP against the 374 km of the JAC E30X. That is a difference of 80 km.
Which one can power appliances from a socket (V2L)?
Only the Volkswagen ID. Polo — its 52 kWh battery then works as a power source. The JAC E30X, with 51.5 kWh, does not offer it.
Which is more powerful — JAC E30X or Volkswagen ID. Polo?
The Volkswagen ID. Polo is stronger: 211 PS against the 136 PS of the JAC E30X. The gap is 75 PS.
Which has the bigger boot?
The Volkswagen ID. Polo takes more: 441 l against 310 l in the JAC E30X. The difference is 131 l.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.