Mazda MX-5 2009 vs Volvo C70 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 126 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 167 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 11 seconds | |
| Mazda MX-5 engine produces 10 HP less power than Volvo C70, whereas torque is 153 NM less than Volvo C70. Despite less power, Mazda MX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo C70 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda MX-5 consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C70, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda MX-5 could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda MX-5 consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 52 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1060 km on highway | ||
| 620 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo C70 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo C70) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Mazda MX-5) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.72 m | 4.62 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.26 m | 1.40 m | |
| Mazda MX-5 is 11 cm longer than the Volvo C70, 12 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda MX-5 is 15 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 150 litres | 200 litres | |
|
Volvo C70 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mazda MX-5 has 50 litres less trunk space than the Volvo C70. This could mean that the Mazda MX-5 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda MX-5 is 1.8 metres less than that of the Volvo C70, which means Mazda MX-5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`375 | 2`130 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 10 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda MX-5 has
|
Volvo C70 has
| |