BMW 3 series 2010 vs Volvo V60 2010
| Body: | Cabrio | Estate car / wagon | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 184 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.3 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 21 HP more power than Volvo V60, but torque is 20 NM less than Volvo V60. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.1 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V60, which means that by driving the BMW 3 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 61 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1190 km in combined cycle | 1210 km in combined cycle | |
| 1380 km on highway | 1520 km on highway | ||
| 1000 km with real consumption | 1030 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) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo V60) 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 (BMW 3 series) 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. | |||
| BMW 3 sērija 2010 2.0 engine: Because of problems with the timing chain, which tends to stretch at 100,000 km, the BMW N47 engine is sometimes called the worst BMW engine. Replacing the timing chain also requires removing the engine from ... More about BMW 3 sērija 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.61 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.38 m | 1.48 m | |
|
BMW 3 series is smaller. BMW 3 series is 2 cm shorter than the Volvo V60, 8 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 210 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
350 litres | no data | |
|
Volvo V60 has more luggage space. BMW 3 series has 220 litres less trunk space than the Volvo V60. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.5 metres less than that of the Volvo V60, which means BMW 3 series can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`085 | 2`090 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Volvo V60 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Volvo V60 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for BMW 3 series, so Volvo V60 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 13 200 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Volvo V60 has
| |