Subaru Outback 2003 vs Volvo V70 2005
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Subaru Outback) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Volvo V70) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 173 HP | 185 HP | |
| Torque: | 227 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Volvo V70 is a more dynamic driving. Subaru Outback engine produces 12 HP less power than Volvo V70, whereas torque is 173 NM less than Volvo V70. Due to the lower power, Subaru Outback reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.7 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V70 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Subaru Outback consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Subaru Outback could require 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Subaru Outback consumes 2 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 | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 1090 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V70 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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 | 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: | 13 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | 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. | |||
| 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: | 4.73 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`160 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.0/10 | 8.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Outback has
|
Volvo V70 has
| |