Volvo C70 2006 vs BMW 3 series 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.8 seconds | 8.1 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Volvo C70 engine produces 78 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 50 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Volvo C70 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 7.8 | |
|
The BMW 3 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volvo C70 consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo C70 could require 270 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 63 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 640 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| BMW 3 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo C70) 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 (BMW 3 series) 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. | |||
| Volvo C70 2006 2.4 engine: The strengths of this engine lie in its durable components, long lifespan, reliability in everyday use, and substantial power reserves.
However, there are notable weaknesses. Early models were equipped ... More about Volvo C70 2006 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.58 m | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.38 m | |
| Volvo C70 and BMW 3 series are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 200 litres | 210 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
404 litres | 350 litres | |
| Volvo C70 has 10 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo C70 (by 54 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.7 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo C70 is 1.7 metres more than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Volvo C70 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`090 | 2`115 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo C70 has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 5000 | 9600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo C70 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |