Volvo V60 2018 vs Mercedes C class 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.1 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 204 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 500 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 6.9 seconds | |
|
Mercedes C class is a more dynamic driving. Volvo V60 engine produces 54 HP less power than Mercedes C class, whereas torque is 180 NM less than Mercedes C class. Due to the lower power, Volvo V60 reaches 100 km/h speed 3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.6 | 4.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.1 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V60 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Volvo V60 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes C class, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo V60 could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volvo V60 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 66 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1190 km in combined cycle | 1460 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km with real consumption | 970 km with real consumption | ||
| Mercedes C class 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) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo V60) 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 (Mercedes C class) 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. | |||
| Mercedes C klase 2013 2.1 engine: The engine has a long service life if it is serviced on time and has reasonable fuel consumption. The most common problems are caused by the engine chain tensioner and the fuel delivery system. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.76 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Volvo V60 is larger, but slightly lower. Volvo V60 is 6 cm longer than the Mercedes C class, 4 cm wider, while the height of Volvo V60 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 529 litres | 490 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1364 litres | no data | |
|
Volvo V60 has more luggage capacity. Volvo V60 has 39 litres more trunk space than the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V60 is 0.1 metres more than that of the Mercedes C class. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`230 | 2`235 | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Volvo V60 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Mercedes C class has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo V60 has serious deffects in 105 percent more cases than Mercedes C class, so Mercedes C class quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 23 800 | 16 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V60 has
|
Mercedes C klase has
| |