Volvo V50 2004 vs Volkswagen Passat 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 220 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.9 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Volvo V50 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo V50 engine produces 70 HP more power than Volkswagen Passat, whereas torque is 120 NM more than Volkswagen Passat. Thanks to more power Volvo V50 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.8 | 8.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.3 l/100km | 8.8 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Passat is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V50 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo V50 could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V50 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 700 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 660 km with real consumption | 790 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Passat 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: | 390'000 km | 350'000 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 V50 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo S40, Volvo C30, Volvo C70 | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi A3, Seat Altea, Seat Leon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Passat might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Passat 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 Passat 2005 2.0 engine: 2.0 FSI engine, part of the EA827 family, features a lightweight aluminum block with cast-iron liners and a unique timing system. A toothed belt drives the exhaust camshaft, while the intake camshaft is driven by a single-row chain, which also integrates with the variable valve timing mechanism. The timing regulator is ... More about Volkswagen Passat 2005 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.51 m | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.52 m | |
|
Volvo V50 is smaller. Volvo V50 is 26 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Passat, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo V50 is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 417 litres | 603 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1307 litres | no data | |
|
Volkswagen Passat has more luggage space. Volvo V50 has 186 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Passat. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V50 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Passat, which means Volvo V50 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`850 | 1`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Volvo V50 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Passat has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Volvo V50, so Volvo V50 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 6.4/10 | 8.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V50 has
|
Volkswagen Passat has
| |