Volvo V60 2013 vs BMW 3 series 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Volvo V60) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (BMW 3 series) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 184 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 290 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.4 seconds | 7.9 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Volvo V60 engine produces 21 HP less power than BMW 3 series, but torque is 110 NM more than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Volvo V60 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.9 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.3 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V60 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V60 consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Volvo V60 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 180 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V60 consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 68 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1380 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 1580 km on highway | 1200 km on highway | ||
| 1070 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V60 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) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
BMW 3 sērija 2015: BMW xDrive is a proactive all-wheel drive system without a center differential that engages before the vehicle becomes destabilized, unnoticed by the driver. Torque is distributed between the axles by an electronically controlled multi-plate clutch in the transfer case. The clutch is partially locked at most times, distributing power to both axles in a 40/60 front/rear ratio, but the system is capable of sending 100% of the torque to either axle. At higher speeds or when parking, multi-plate clutch is disengaged and all power is transferred to the rear wheels. DSC system (Dynamic Stability Control) also brakes the wheels separately to regain traction and assist in cornering. | |||
| BMW 3 sērija 2015 2.0 engine: Compared to their predecessors, B48 engines are more robust and less prone to major failures. They are well-suited for chip tuning, which can noticeably enhance performance and responsiveness without ... More about BMW 3 sērija 2015 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.43 m | |
| Volvo V60 and BMW 3 series are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 495 litres | |
|
BMW 3 series has more luggage space. Volvo V60 has 65 litres less trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V60 is 0.4 metres less than that of the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`200 | 2`185 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Volvo V60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volvo V60, so Volvo V60 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 12 200 | 15 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V60 has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |