Subaru Outback 2003 vs Volvo XC70 2002
| 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 XC70) 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 | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 227 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 11.5 seconds | |
|
Subaru Outback is more dynamic to drive. Subaru Outback engine produces 10 HP more power than Volvo XC70, but torque is 113 NM less than Volvo XC70. Thanks to more power Subaru Outback reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.7 l/100km | 8.4 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC70 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Subaru Outback consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC70, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Subaru Outback could require 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Subaru Outback consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 64 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo XC70 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) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
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 XC70 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo C30 | |
| 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 XC70 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 XC70 2002 2.4 engine: These diesel engines are frequently affected by intake manifold swirl flap seizures. This issue often leads to airflow disruptions and rough engine operation.
The actuator for the turbocharger, which relies ... More about Volvo XC70 2002 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.73 m | 4.73 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.86 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.56 m | |
| Subaru Outback and Volvo XC70 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1641 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Outback is 0.8 metres less than that of the Volvo XC70, which means Subaru Outback can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 2200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.0/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Outback has
|
Volvo XC70 has
| |