Alfa Romeo 166 2002 vs Volvo S90 1997
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 2.9 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 226 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 275 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Alfa Romeo 166 is more dynamic to drive. Alfa Romeo 166 engine produces 46 HP more power than Volvo S90, whereas torque is 15 NM more than Volvo S90. Thanks to more power Alfa Romeo 166 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.0 | 11.7 | |
|
The Volvo S90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Alfa Romeo 166 consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S90, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Alfa Romeo 166 could require 195 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 72 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 550 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| Volvo S90 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Alfa Romeo 166) 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 S90) 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 | 4.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.42 m | |
| Alfa Romeo 166 is 15 cm shorter than the Volvo S90, 7 cm wider, while the height of Alfa Romeo 166 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 500 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 9.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Alfa Romeo 166 is 1.9 metres more than that of the Volvo S90, which means Alfa Romeo 166 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`020 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Alfa Romeo 166 has
|
Volvo S90 has
| |