Mazda 6 2005 vs Volvo V70 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 121 HP | 185 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Volvo V70 is a more dynamic driving. Mazda 6 engine produces 64 HP less power than Volvo V70, whereas torque is 80 NM less than Volvo V70. Due to the lower power, Mazda 6 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.1 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 6 consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70, which means that by driving the Mazda 6 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 270 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 6 consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1040 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 1230 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| 960 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 390'000 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: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda 5 | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volvo V70 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| 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: | 4.71 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.49 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 6 and Volvo V70 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 litres | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1712 litres | 1641 litres | |
| Mazda 6 has 20 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V70. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 6 (by 71 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 6 is 1.1 metres less than that of the Volvo V70, which means Mazda 6 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`040 | 2`160 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Mazda 6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo V70 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda 6, so Mazda 6 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.7/10 | 8.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 6 has
|
Volvo V70 has
| |