Opel Omega 1999 vs Volvo V90 1997

Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison

 
Opel Omega
1999 - 2003
Volvo V90
1997 - 1998
Gearbox: Manual/AutomaticManual/Automatic
Engines: 2.0 - 5.7 (petrol, diesel)2.9 - 3.0 (petrol)

Performance

Power: 100 - 310 HP180 - 204 HP
Torque: 203 - 450 NM260 - 267 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 7 - 16 seconds9.2 - 9.4 seconds
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison!

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 6.7 - 14.011.0 - 11.7
Opel Omega petrol engines consumes on average 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than Volvo V90.
This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version!

Dimensions

Length: 4.90 m4.86 m
Width: 1.78 m1.75 m
Height: 1.50 m1.45 m
Opel Omega is larger.
Opel Omega is 4 cm longer than the Volvo V90, 3 cm wider, while the height of Opel Omega is 5 cm higher.
Trunk capacity: 540 litres992 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
1800 litres1702 litres
Despite its longer length, Opel Omega has 452 litres less trunk space than the Volvo V90. This could mean that the Opel Omega uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Opel Omega (by 98 litres).
Turning diameter: 11 meters9.7 meters
The turning circle of the Opel Omega is 1.3 metres more than that of the Volvo V90, which means Opel Omega can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces.
Gross weight (kg): ~ 2`274~ 2`100
Safety: no datano data
Quality:
below average
no data
Average price (€): 12002200
Pros and Cons: Opel Omega has
  • petrol and diesel engines available
  • lower fuel consumption
  • lower price
Volvo V90 has
  • only petrol engines available
  • roomier boot
  • better manoeuvrability
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv