Mitsubishi Colt 2007 vs Volvo C70 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 2.4 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 180 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 9.5 seconds | |
|
Volvo C70 is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 71 HP less power than Volvo C70, whereas torque is 205 NM less than Volvo C70. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.0 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C70, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi Colt over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo C70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km on highway | 1060 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo C70 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is smaller, but higher. Mitsubishi Colt is 71 cm shorter than the Volvo C70, 13 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 190 litres | 200 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 404 litres | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has 10 litres less trunk space than the Volvo C70. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 12.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 1.9 metres less than that of the Volvo C70, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`090 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo C70 has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 5600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Volvo C70 has
| |