Volvo C70 1999 vs Toyota Celica 1995
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 175 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 186 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.7 seconds | 8.6 seconds | |
|
Toyota Celica is a more dynamic driving. Volvo C70 engine produces 12 HP less power than Toyota Celica, but torque is 44 NM more than Toyota Celica. Due to the lower power, Volvo C70 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.6 | 9.9 | |
|
The Toyota Celica is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volvo C70 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Celica, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo C70 could require 105 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 68 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 640 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| Volvo C70 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.72 m | 4.50 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.33 m | |
|
Volvo C70 is larger. Volvo C70 is 22 cm longer than the Toyota Celica, 7 cm wider, while the height of Volvo C70 is 10 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo C70 is 0.7 metres more than that of the Toyota Celica, which means Volvo C70 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`950 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2200 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo C70 has
|
Toyota Celica has
| |