Volvo C70 2009 vs Volkswagen EOS 2011
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
|
Volvo C70 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo C70 engine produces 30 HP more power than Volkswagen EOS, but torque is 90 NM less than Volkswagen EOS. Thanks to more power Volvo C70 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 4.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.4 l/100km | 5.9 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen EOS is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo C70 consumes 4.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen EOS, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo C70 could require 720 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo C70 consumes 3.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 640 km in combined cycle | 1140 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km on highway | 1300 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 930 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen EOS gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 510'000 km | 390'000 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 C70 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo S40, Volvo V50, Volvo C30 | Installed on at least 12 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Sharan, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen EOS might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volkswagen EOS 2011 2.0 engine: The engine is very durable and can last a long time with proper maintenance, and is also quite economical for its power. There may be some problems with the turbine geometry. It is important to use good ... More about Volkswagen EOS 2011 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.62 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.84 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Volvo C70 is larger, but lower. Volvo C70 is 19 cm longer than the Volkswagen EOS, 5 cm wider, while the height of Volvo C70 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 200 litres | 205 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 380 litres | |
| Volvo C70 has 5 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo C70 is 0.9 metres more than that of the Volkswagen EOS, which means Volvo C70 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`090 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 9600 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo C70 has
|
Volkswagen EOS has
| |