CarComparison home

Compare cars on reliability and running costs, and check any car by its reg

Used Volkswagen Polo Mk5 (2009–17) vs Peugeot 208 Mk1 (2012–19)

Figures updated

Shopping for a used supermini? We compare the Volkswagen Polo Mk5 (2009–2017) and Peugeot 208 Mk1 (2012–2019), which were on sale at the same time, on size, boot space, performance, safety and running costs, plus how cars of their age do in real MOT tests.

Change cars or mileage

The short answer

The Volkswagen Polo Mk5 comes out ahead, with the better MOT record; the Peugeot 208 Mk1 is close on everything else.

FigureVolkswagen Polo Mk5Mk5 (2009–2017), 5-door hatchbackPeugeot 208 Mk1Mk1 (2012–2019), 5-door hatchback
Price and practicality
Body5-door hatchback5-door hatchback
Seats55
BootSeats up / folded280 litres / 952285 litres
Length3,970mm3,973mm
WidthWithout mirrors1,682mm1,739mm
Height1,462mm1,460mm
Performance
Power60–192 PS68–208 PS (best)
0–62mph6.7–16.1 sec6.5–17.9 sec
Safety
Euro NCAP ratingTests get tougher each year★★★★★ (2009)★★★★★ (2012)
Economy and emissions
Fuel typesDiesel, Petrol–
Official economyVersions of this generation47.1–76.3 mpg–
CO297–140 g/km–
Running costs at 7,500 miles a year
Petrol or hybrid171.8p a litre, today's UK average£995 (58.9 mpg)–
Diesel198.4p a litre£910 (74.3 mpg)–
Cheapest version to fuelWhichever fuel costs least£910 (diesel)–
Car tax, registered 2001 to 2017Taxed on CO2; newer cars pay a flat £200£20 to £410–
Reliability from real MOT tests
Reliability score87Below average (best)78Well below average
Failed first time, cars of this generation's ageUK rate for cars the same age in brackets34.2% (31.9%)built 2009–2017 (best)31.7% (26.6%)built 2012–2019
Failed MOT first time (ages 3–20)32.9%29.4% (best)
Failed at 3 years old11.8% (best)14.1%
Failed at 5 years old19.9%20.3%
Failed at 10 years old34.3% (best)37.3%
Most common MOT faultPins and bushes (3.1% of tests)Joints (4.4% of tests)
Fails more than average onSteering (1.6×), Body and structure (1.5×)Body and structure (4.1×), Exhaust and emissions (3.1×)
MOT tests analysed600,518202,735
About the cars
TypeSuperminiSupermini
Owners' average miles a year6,7007,000
On sale2009–20172012–2019

Green marks the better figure where the difference is more than 3%. Reliability figures cover every version of each model tested in the year. Running costs use the typical official economy of recent versions (WLTP where available); real-world economy is usually a little worse for every car.

More comparisons

Frequently asked questions

›Is a used Volkswagen Polo Mk5 or Peugeot 208 Mk1 more reliable?

The Volkswagen Polo Mk5. Compared with all cars the same age, the Volkswagen Polo Mk5 fails its MOT 7% more often than average and the Peugeot 208 Mk1 19% more often than average (DVSA MOT tests, 2024). Because they're different ages, their raw rates differ: 34.2% of Volkswagen Polos built 2009–2017 failed first time, and 31.7% of Peugeot 208s built 2012–2019. Whatever you buy, check the MOT history of the exact car.

›Which is bigger, the Volkswagen Polo Mk5 or the Peugeot 208 Mk1?

They're almost the same length (3,970mm and 3,973mm). Their boots are much the same: 280 and 285 litres.

›Which is safer, the Volkswagen Polo Mk5 or the Peugeot 208 Mk1?

Euro NCAP gave the Volkswagen Polo Mk5 5 stars (2009) and the Peugeot 208 Mk1 5 stars (2012). Euro NCAP makes its tests tougher every few years, so ratings from different years aren't directly comparable.

›Should I buy the Volkswagen Polo Mk5 or the Peugeot 208 Mk1?

The Volkswagen Polo Mk5 comes out ahead, with the better MOT record; the Peugeot 208 Mk1 is close on everything else. The comparison above sets out price, space, performance, safety, running costs and reliability side by side.

Sources: manufacturers' UK specifications and price lists and Euro NCAP (listed on each model's page); DVSA anonymised MOT tests 2024 (Open Government Licence v3.0); Vehicle Certification Agency car fuel data, © Crown copyright, VCA cannot accept liability for its accuracy; fuel prices from the GOV.UK Fuel Finder scheme. Photos from Wikimedia Commons, credited under each picture.