Mazda MX-5 2009 vs Volvo C70 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 160 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 188 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.6 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Mazda MX-5 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda MX-5 engine produces 20 HP more power than Volvo C70, but torque is 32 NM less than Volvo C70. Thanks to more power Mazda MX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 8.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 9.8 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda MX-5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda MX-5 consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C70, which means that by driving the Mazda MX-5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 195 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda MX-5 consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 630 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: | 4.02 m | 4.62 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.26 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Mazda MX-5 is smaller. Mazda MX-5 is 59 cm shorter 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. Mazda MX-5 has 50 litres less trunk space than the Volvo C70. | |||
| 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`070 | |
| 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
| |