Ford Scorpio 1992 vs Volvo 850 1993
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 182 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Volvo 850 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Scorpio engine produces 45 HP less power than Volvo 850, whereas torque is 38 NM less than Volvo 850. Due to the lower power, Ford Scorpio reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.3 | 9.1 | |
|
The Volvo 850 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Scorpio consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo 850, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Scorpio could require 180 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 73 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| Volvo 850 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 (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: | 4.74 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.43 m | |
| Ford Scorpio is 3 cm longer than the Volvo 850, width is practically the same , while the height of Ford Scorpio is 6 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`475 | 1`600 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Volvo 850 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Scorpio has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Volvo 850, so Volvo 850 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Scorpio has
|
Volvo 850 has
| |