Ford Mondeo 2005 vs Volvo V70 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Double-row timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 185 HP | |
| Torque: | 245 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.4 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Volvo V70 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Mondeo engine produces 95 HP less power than Volvo V70, whereas torque is 155 NM less than Volvo V70. Due to the lower power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 4.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Mondeo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Mondeo consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70, which means that by driving the Ford Mondeo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 285 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Mondeo consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 56 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 930 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 1210 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| 860 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 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 V70 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo XC70, Volvo XC60 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo V70 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volvo V70 2005 2.4 engine: The early versions of these engines are known for their reliability and rare failures, which made them popular.
However, engine have several common weaknesses. Intake manifold swirl flaps often seize, and ... More about Volvo V70 2005 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.49 m | |
|
Ford Mondeo is larger, but lower. Ford Mondeo is 9 cm longer than the Volvo V70, 1 cm wider, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1700 litres | 1641 litres | |
|
Ford Mondeo has more luggage capacity. Ford Mondeo has 55 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V70. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Mondeo (by 59 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.8 metres less than that of the Volvo V70, which means Ford Mondeo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`140 | 2`160 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Ford Mondeo has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volvo V70, so Ford Mondeo quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.3/10 | 8.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Volvo V70 has
| |