Subaru Outback 2003 vs Volvo V70 2004
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 173 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 227 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Volvo V70 is a more dynamic driving. Subaru Outback engine produces 3 HP more power than Volvo V70, but torque is 3 NM less than Volvo V70. Despite the higher power, Subaru Outback reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 9.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.7 l/100km | 9.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V70 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Subaru Outback consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70, which means that by driving the Subaru Outback over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Subaru Outback consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 km | 560'000 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: | 13 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo S40, Volvo V50, 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. | |||
| 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 2004 2.4 engine: The strengths of this engine lie in its durable components, long lifespan, reliability in everyday use, and substantial power reserves.
However, there are notable weaknesses. Early models were equipped ... More about Volvo V70 2004 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.73 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.49 m | |
| Subaru Outback is 2 cm longer than the Volvo V70, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Outback is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1641 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Outback is 1.1 metres less than that of the Volvo V70, which means Subaru Outback can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 2200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.0/10 | 8.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Outback has
|
Volvo V70 has
| |