Audi A6 2001 vs Volvo XC70 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 370 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.1 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Audi A6 is more dynamic to drive. Audi A6 engine produces 17 HP more power than Volvo XC70, whereas torque is 30 NM more than Volvo XC70. Thanks to more power Audi A6 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.2 l/100km | 8.4 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC70 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Audi A6 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC70, which means that by driving the Audi A6 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Audi A6 consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 860 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 1120 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | |
|
Volvo XC70 2000: Automatic four-wheel drive with torque transfer to rear axle via viscous clutch when front wheels slip. Electronic traction control on front wheels (TRACS), which operates at speeds up to 40 km/h (25 mph) | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 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 Volvo XC70 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Audi A4, Audi A8 | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo C30 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo XC70 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volvo XC70 2002 2.4 engine: These diesel engines are frequently affected by intake manifold swirl flap seizures. This issue often leads to airflow disruptions and rough engine operation.
The actuator for the turbocharger, which relies ... More about Volvo XC70 2002 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.73 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.56 m | |
| Audi A6 is 7 cm longer than the Volvo XC70, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Audi A6 is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 455 litres | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1641 litres | |
|
Volvo XC70 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Audi A6 has 30 litres less trunk space than the Volvo XC70. This could mean that the Audi A6 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi A6 is 0.1 metres more than that of the Volvo XC70. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`200 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Audi A6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo XC70 has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Audi A6, so Audi A6 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 2000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi A6 has
|
Volvo XC70 has
| |