Volvo V50 2004 vs BMW 3 series 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 8.8 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Volvo V50 engine produces 27 HP less power than BMW 3 series, the torque is the same for both cars. Due to the lower power, Volvo V50 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.7 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V50 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V50 consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Volvo V50 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 180 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V50 consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 61 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 960 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 1190 km on highway | 1100 km on highway | ||
| 850 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V50 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.52 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.44 m | |
|
Volvo V50 is smaller, but slightly higher. Volvo V50 is 1 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo V50 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 417 litres | 460 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1307 litres | 1385 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage space. Volvo V50 has 43 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW 3 series (by 78 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V50 is 0.4 metres less than that of the BMW 3 series, which means Volvo V50 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`850 kg | 2`060 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`456 kg | 1`510 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 394 kg | 550 kg | |
| Volvo V50 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 40 procentiem less than BMW 3 series. Therefore, BMW 3 series is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| BMW 3 series has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volvo V50, so BMW 3 series quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 3400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.4/10 | 7.7/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V50 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |