Lancia Ypsilon vs Volkswagen ID. Polo
Biggest differences: AC charging — Lancia Ypsilon 7.4 kW, Volkswagen ID. Polo 11 kW · Boot — Lancia Ypsilon 309 l, Volkswagen ID. Polo 441 l · Power — Lancia Ypsilon 156 PS, Volkswagen ID. Polo 211 PS.
Lancia Ypsilon
The Lancia Ypsilon is a city hatchback in the B-segment, offered with two electric powertrain configurations offering different power outputs and performance characteristics.
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: Lancia Ypsilon vs Volkswagen ID. Polo
Lancia YpsilonElectric
Volkswagen ID. Polo52 kWh 155 kW
Lancia Ypsilon or Volkswagen ID. Polo — who wins where
Volkswagen ID. Polo leads 10 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 +29 km
- Battery kWhVolkswagen ID. Polo +1 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmVolkswagen ID. Polo −1.1 kWh/100 km
- Power PSVolkswagen ID. Polo +55 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sVolkswagen ID. Polo −1.6 s
- Top speed km/hVolkswagen ID. Polo +10 km/h
- DC charging kWVolkswagen ID. Polo +5 kW
- AC charging kWVolkswagen ID. Polo +3.6 kW
- Charging ↓ minVolkswagen ID. Polo −4 min
- Weight ↓ kgLancia Ypsilon −15 kg
- Boot lVolkswagen ID. Polo +132 l
Technical data: Lancia Ypsilon vs Volkswagen ID. Polo
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Lancia Ypsilon Electric | Volkswagen ID. Polo 52 kWh 155 kW | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 425 km | 454 km | Volkswagen +29 km |
| Battery | 51 kWh | 52 kWh | Volkswagen +1 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 14.4 kWh/100 km | 13.3 kWh/100 km | Volkswagen −1.1 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 100 kW | 105 kW | Volkswagen +5 kW |
| AC charging | 7.4 kW | 11 kW | Volkswagen +3.6 kW |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 28 min | 24 min | Volkswagen −4 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 10.6 km/min | 13.2 km/min | Volkswagen +2.6 km/min |
| Voltage | 400 V | 400 V | No difference |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 156 PS | 211 PS | Volkswagen +55 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 9 s | 7.4 s | Volkswagen −1.6 s |
| Top speed | 150 km/h | 160 km/h | Volkswagen +10 km/h |
| Drivetrain | FWD | FWD | — |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 1561 kg | 1576 kg | Lancia −15 kg |
| Boot | 309 l | 441 l | Volkswagen +132 l |
| V2L (external power) | No | Yes | only Volkswagen |
| Length | 4080 mm | 4053 mm | Lancia +27 mm |
| Width | 1768 mm | 1816 mm | Volkswagen +48 mm |
| Height | 1440 mm | 1530 mm | Volkswagen +90 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2545 mm | 2600 mm | Volkswagen +55 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
Lancia Ypsilon
Volkswagen ID. Polo
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Lancia Ypsilon
Volkswagen ID. Polo
Other comparisons in this class: Hatchback, segment B
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — Lancia Ypsilon or Volkswagen ID. Polo?
The Volkswagen ID. Polo goes further: 454 km WLTP against the 425 km of the Lancia Ypsilon. That is a difference of 29 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 Lancia Ypsilon, with 51 kWh, does not offer it.
Which is more powerful — Lancia Ypsilon or Volkswagen ID. Polo?
The Volkswagen ID. Polo is stronger: 211 PS against the 156 PS of the Lancia Ypsilon. The gap is 55 PS.
Which has the bigger boot?
The Volkswagen ID. Polo takes more: 441 l against 309 l in the Lancia Ypsilon. The difference is 132 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.