Volvo 960 1990 vs Volvo V70 1999
| Body: | Sedan | Estate car / wagon | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The wagon generally has more cargo space due to a larger trunk door opening, a roof that extends as far back as possible, and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into cargo space. Sedans tend to be quieter than wagons due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 2.9 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 204 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 267 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
|
Volvo 960 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo 960 engine produces 64 HP more power than Volvo V70, whereas torque is 47 NM more than Volvo V70. Thanks to more power Volvo 960 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.0 | 9.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.4 l/100km | 9.9 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V70 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo 960 consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo 960 could require 240 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo 960 consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo V70) 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 (Volvo 960) 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 560'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volvo V70 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volvo S90, Volvo V90 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo S40, Volvo V50, Volvo S70 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo V70 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.87 m | 4.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.41 m | |
| Volvo 960 is 15 cm longer than the Volvo V70, 1 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 491 litres | 420 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1580 litres | |
|
Volvo 960 has more luggage capacity. Volvo 960 has 71 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V70. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.9 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo 960 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volvo V70. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`960 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo 960 has
|
Volvo V70 has
| |