Volkswagen Golf 1999 vs Volvo V50 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 145 HP | |
| Torque: | 170 NM | 185 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Volvo V50 is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Golf engine produces 30 HP less power than Volvo V50, whereas torque is 15 NM less than Volvo V50. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Golf reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V50 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volkswagen Golf consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V50, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Golf could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volkswagen Golf consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V50. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 700 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V50 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 580'000 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 Volkswagen Golf engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Skoda Octavia, Volkswagen Bora, Volkswagen Beetle | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S40, Volvo C30 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo V50 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.40 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Volkswagen Golf is smaller, but slightly higher. Volkswagen Golf is 11 cm shorter than the Volvo V50, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Golf is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 460 litres | 417 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1470 litres | 1307 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Golf has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Volkswagen Golf has 43 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V50. The Volvo V50 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 163 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Golf is 0.3 metres more than that of the Volvo V50. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`810 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Volkswagen Golf has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo V50 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Volkswagen Golf, so Volkswagen Golf quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 2000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.6/10 | 6.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Golf has
|
Volvo V50 has
| |