Volvo S90 1997 vs Alfa Romeo 166 1998
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.9 Petrol | 3.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 204 HP | 226 HP | |
| Torque: | 267 NM | 275 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.1 seconds | 8.5 seconds | |
|
Alfa Romeo 166 is a more dynamic driving. Volvo S90 engine produces 22 HP less power than Alfa Romeo 166, whereas torque is 8 NM less than Alfa Romeo 166. Due to the lower power, Volvo S90 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.4 | 13.0 | |
|
The Volvo S90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volvo S90 consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Alfa Romeo 166, which means that by driving the Volvo S90 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 240 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 72 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 550 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 770 km on highway | ||
| Volvo S90 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Alfa Romeo 166) 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 (Volvo S90) 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.87 m | 4.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.41 m | |
| Volvo S90 is 15 cm longer than the Alfa Romeo 166, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo S90 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 500 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 9.7 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo S90 is 1.9 metres less than that of the Alfa Romeo 166, which means Volvo S90 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 2`020 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S90 has
|
Alfa Romeo 166 has
| |