Volkswagen Passat 2005 vs Volvo V50 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| 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: | 116 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 155 NM | 150 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Passat engine produces 16 HP more power than Volvo V50, whereas torque is 5 NM more than Volvo V50. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Passat reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V50 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Passat consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V50, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Passat could require 60 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 920 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Passat gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 440'000 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 V50 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volvo S40, Volvo C30 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Passat might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volkswagen Passat engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Volkswagen Passat 2005 1.6 engine: Owners of vehicles with this engine often report difficulties starting in cold weather. Carbon buildup tends to cause sticking in the intake valves, throttle body, and EGR valve, leading to performance ... More about Volkswagen Passat 2005 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.77 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Volkswagen Passat is larger. Volkswagen Passat is 25 cm longer than the Volvo V50, 5 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Passat is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 603 litres | 417 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Passat has more luggage capacity. Volkswagen Passat has 186 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V50. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Passat is 0.3 metres more than that of the Volvo V50. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`300 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Volvo V50 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volkswagen Passat, so Volvo V50 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 3200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 6.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Passat has
|
Volvo V50 has
| |