Ford Scorpio 1994 vs Volvo 850 1993
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Ford Scorpio) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Volvo 850) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Volvo 850 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Scorpio engine produces 54 HP less power than Volvo 850, but torque is 40 NM more than Volvo 850. Due to the lower power, Ford Scorpio reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 9.1 | |
|
The Ford Scorpio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Scorpio consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo 850, which means that by driving the Ford Scorpio over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 73 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
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 (Ford Scorpio) 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.83 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.43 m | |
|
Ford Scorpio is larger. Ford Scorpio is 12 cm longer than the Volvo 850, 11 cm wider, while the height of Ford Scorpio is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.4 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Scorpio is 0.2 metres more than that of the Volvo 850. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`685 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Volvo 850 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Scorpio has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volvo 850, so Volvo 850 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Scorpio has
|
Volvo 850 has
| |