Mercedes C class 2001 vs Volvo V50 2004
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.7 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.1 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Mercedes C class is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes C class engine produces 34 HP more power than Volvo V50, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Volvo V50. Thanks to more power Mercedes C class reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 6.4 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V50 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes C class consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V50, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes C class could require 210 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes C class consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V50. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 870 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| 1100 km on highway | 1190 km on highway | ||
| 780 km with real consumption | 850 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V50 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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 V50) 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 (Mercedes C class) 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: | 4.54 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.73 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.45 m | |
| Mercedes C class is 3 cm longer than the Volvo V50, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Mercedes C class is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 470 litres | 417 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1384 litres | 1307 litres | |
|
Mercedes C class has more luggage capacity. Mercedes C class has 53 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V50. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mercedes C class (by 77 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes C class is 0.2 metres more than that of the Volvo V50. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`175 kg | 1`850 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`575 kg | 1`456 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 600 kg | 394 kg | |
| Mercedes C class load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 34 procentiem more than Volvo V50. Therefore, Mercedes C class is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 1800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.6/10 | 6.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes C klase has
|
Volvo V50 has
| |