Opel Omega 1997 vs Volvo V70 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 211 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 290 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Opel Omega is more dynamic to drive. Opel Omega engine produces 71 HP more power than Volvo V70, but torque is 20 NM less than Volvo V70. Thanks to more power Opel Omega reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.2 | 6.3 | |
|
The Volvo V70 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Opel Omega consumes 4.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Opel Omega could require 735 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 1070 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 1360 km on highway | ||
| Volvo V70 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 V70) 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 (Opel Omega) 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 530'000 km | 560'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Opel Sintra | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo 850, Volvo S70 | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.82 m | 4.72 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Opel Omega is larger. Opel Omega is 10 cm longer than the Volvo V70, 3 cm wider, while the height of Opel Omega is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 420 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1800 litres | 1580 litres | |
|
Opel Omega has more luggage capacity. Opel Omega has 120 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V70. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Opel Omega (by 220 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Omega is 0.8 metres more than that of the Volvo V70, which means Opel Omega can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`280 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Omega has
|
Volvo V70 has
| |