Volvo 850 1994 vs Audi 80 1992
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Volvo 850) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Audi 80) 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: | 144 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 206 NM | 202 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 14 seconds | |
|
Volvo 850 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo 850 engine produces 54 HP more power than Audi 80, whereas torque is 4 NM more than Audi 80. Thanks to more power Volvo 850 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.5 l/100km | 5.7 l/100km | |
|
The Audi 80 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo 850 consumes 3.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi 80, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo 850 could require 540 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo 850 consumes 3.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi 80. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 73 litres | 66 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 1200 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km with real consumption | 1150 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi 80 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 630'000 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 Audi 80 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S70 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Audi A6, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Vento, Seat Alhambra | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Audi 80 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Audi 80 1992 1.9 engine: This engine stands out for its durability and generally remains trouble-free until it has been used extensively over many years. Despite its robust construction, the wear and tear from prolonged use, ... More about Audi 80 1992 1.9 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.72 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.41 m | |
|
Volvo 850 is larger. Volvo 850 is 24 cm longer than the Audi 80, 6 cm wider, while the height of Volvo 850 is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 420 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1580 litres | 1200 litres | |
|
Volvo 850 has more luggage capacity. Volvo 850 has 50 litres more trunk space than the Audi 80. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo 850 (by 380 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo 850 is 0.6 metres less than that of the Audi 80, which means Volvo 850 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`970 | 1`860 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Volvo 850 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Audi 80 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volvo 850, so Volvo 850 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.5/10 | 7.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo 850 has
|
Audi 80 has
| |