BMW 3 series 2005 vs Volvo S60 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 185 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.3 seconds | 8.7 seconds | |
| BMW 3 series engine produces 22 HP less power than Volvo S60, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Volvo S60. Despite less power, BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.7 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S60, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 61 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 930 km in combined cycle | |
| 1150 km on highway | 1160 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 940 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 km | 480'000 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 S60 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on BMW 1 sērija | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo XC90, Volvo XC70, Volvo XC60 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Volvo S60 2005 2.4 engine: The early versions of these engines are known for their reliability and rare failures, which made them popular.
However, engine have several common weaknesses. Intake manifold swirl flaps often seize, and ... More about Volvo S60 2005 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.52 m | 4.60 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.43 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. BMW 3 series is 8 cm shorter than the Volvo S60, 2 cm wider, while the height of BMW 3 series is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 460 litres | 424 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1034 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, BMW 3 series has 36 litres more trunk space than the Volvo S60. The Volvo S60 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`965 | 2`050 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo S60 has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3800 | 2600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.7/10 | 8.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Volvo S60 has
| |