Volvo C30 2009 vs Volkswagen Beetle 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 145 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 175 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.4 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Volvo C30 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo C30 engine produces 40 HP more power than Volkswagen Beetle, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Volkswagen Beetle. Thanks to more power Volvo C30 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Beetle is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo C30 consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Beetle, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo C30 could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo C30 consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Beetle. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 930 km in combined cycle | |
| 940 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Beetle gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 330'000 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 C30 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo V50, Volvo S40 | Installed on at least 14 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Fabia, Seat Altea, Skoda Yeti | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Beetle might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Beetle 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 Beetle 2011 1.2 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its lifetime is relatively short. Vibration at idling speed tends to be excessive. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.27 m | 4.28 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.49 m | |
|
Volvo C30 is smaller. Volvo C30 is 1 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Beetle, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo C30 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 251 litres | 310 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
921 litres | 905 litres | |
| Volvo C30 has 59 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Beetle. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo C30 (by 16 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo C30 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Beetle. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`750 | 1`760 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volkswagen Beetle scores higher in safety tests. The Volkswagen Beetle scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Volkswagen Beetle has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volvo C30, so Volkswagen Beetle quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo C30 has
|
Volkswagen Beetle has
| |