BMW 5 series 1993 vs Volvo 850 1994
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 113 HP | 126 HP | |
| Torque: | 162 NM | 170 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.4 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Volvo 850 is a more dynamic driving. BMW 5 series engine produces 13 HP less power than Volvo 850, whereas torque is 8 NM less than Volvo 850. Due to the lower power, BMW 5 series reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 8.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.1 l/100km | 9.8 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 5 series is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 5 series consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo 850, which means that by driving the BMW 5 series over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 5 series consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo 850. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 73 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 5 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo 850) 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 (BMW 5 series) 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 480'000 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 850 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on BMW 3 sērija | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S70 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo 850 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.72 m | 4.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.43 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. BMW 5 series and Volvo 850 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 460 litres | 420 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1580 litres | |
|
BMW 5 series has more luggage capacity. BMW 5 series has 40 litres more trunk space than the Volvo 850. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 5 series is 0.4 metres more than that of the Volvo 850, which means BMW 5 series can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 1`970 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| BMW 5 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo 850 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than BMW 5 series, so BMW 5 series quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.1/10 | 8.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 5 sērija has
|
Volvo 850 has
| |