Audi 80 1992 vs Volvo 850 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 202 NM | 290 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14 seconds | 10.1 seconds | |
|
Volvo 850 is a more dynamic driving. Audi 80 engine produces 50 HP less power than Volvo 850, whereas torque is 88 NM less than Volvo 850. Due to the lower power, Audi 80 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 6.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.7 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Audi 80 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi 80 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo 850, which means that by driving the Audi 80 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi 80 consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo 850. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 66 litres | 73 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1200 km in combined cycle | 1210 km in combined cycle | |
| 1600 km on highway | 1120 km on highway | ||
| 1150 km with real consumption | 1120 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 630'000 km | 560'000 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 Audi 80 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Audi A6, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Vento, Seat Alhambra | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S70 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Audi 80 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Audi 80 1992 1.9 engine: This engine stands out for its durability and generally remains trouble-free until it has been used extensively over many years. Despite its robust construction, the wear and tear from prolonged use, ... More about Audi 80 1992 1.9 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Audi 80 is smaller. Audi 80 is 24 cm shorter than the Volvo 850, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Audi 80 is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 370 litres | 420 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1200 litres | 1580 litres | |
|
Volvo 850 has more luggage space. Audi 80 has 50 litres less trunk space than the Volvo 850. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo 850 (by 380 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi 80 is 0.6 metres more than that of the Volvo 850, which means Audi 80 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`860 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Volvo 850 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Audi 80 has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Volvo 850, so Volvo 850 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.3/10 | 8.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi 80 has
|
Volvo 850 has
| |