Ford Sierra 1990 vs Volvo 960 1990
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.9 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 204 HP | |
| Torque: | 166 NM | 267 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Volvo 960 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Sierra engine produces 99 HP less power than Volvo 960, whereas torque is 101 NM less than Volvo 960. Due to the lower power, Ford Sierra reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 11.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.4 l/100km | 12.4 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Sierra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Sierra consumes 3.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo 960, which means that by driving the Ford Sierra over 15,000 km in a year you can save 525 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Sierra consumes 3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo 960. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 630 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.47 m | 4.87 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Ford Sierra is smaller. Ford Sierra is 40 cm shorter than the Volvo 960, 5 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 491 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 9.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Sierra is 0.1 metres more than that of the Volvo 960. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`350 | 1`960 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Sierra has
|
Volvo 960 has
| |