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): | 6.7 | 8.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.1 l/100km | 12.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Golf is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Golf consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V60, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Golf over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Golf consumes 3.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 540 km with real consumption | 530 km with real consumption | ||
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 | |
|
Volkswagen Golf has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Volkswagen Golf has 175 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V60. The Volvo V60 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`040 | no data | |
| 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 (€): | 18 600 | 13 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Golf has
|
Volvo V60 has
| |