Volkswagen Golf 2017 vs Volvo V60 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 180 HP | 367 HP | |
| Torque: | 280 NM | 470 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.8 seconds | 4.8 seconds | |
|
Volvo V60 is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Golf engine produces 187 HP less power than Volvo V60, whereas torque is 190 NM less than Volvo V60. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Golf reaches 100 km/h speed 3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 8.1 | |
|
The Volvo V60 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volkswagen Golf consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V60, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Golf could require 225 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 520 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 610 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| Volvo V60 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) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Volvo XC60 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo V60 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volkswagen Golf 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 V60 2016 2.0 engine: Engines in this series are often associated with oil consumption issues, which many owners report over time.
In the initial production years, a common weakness was the coolant reservoir hose, which had a ... More about Volvo V60 2016 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.57 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Volkswagen Golf is smaller, but slightly higher. Volkswagen Golf is 6 cm shorter than the Volvo V60, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Golf is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 605 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1883 litres | 1241 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Golf has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Volvo V60 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Golf (by 642 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Golf is 1 metres less than that of the Volvo V60, which means Volkswagen Golf can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`040 kg | 2`270 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`549 kg | 1`796 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 491 kg | 474 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Volkswagen Golf has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo V60 has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Volkswagen Golf, so Volkswagen Golf quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 9600 | 8800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Golf has
|
Volvo V60 has
| |