Volvo 850 1992 vs Ford Scorpio 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.3 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 202 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Volvo 850 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo 850 engine produces 23 HP more power than Ford Scorpio, whereas torque is 18 NM more than Ford Scorpio. Thanks to more power Volvo 850 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.2 | 10.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.7 l/100km | 11.2 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo 850 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo 850 consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Scorpio, which means that by driving the Volvo 850 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 195 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo 850 consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Scorpio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 73 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 km with real consumption | 620 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo 850 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: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo 850) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (Ford Scorpio) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.66 m | 4.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.39 m | |
|
Volvo 850 is smaller, but slightly higher. Volvo 850 is 16 cm shorter than the Ford Scorpio, 12 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo 850 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo 850 is 0.2 metres less than that of the Ford Scorpio. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Volvo 850 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Ford Scorpio, so Volvo 850 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo 850 has
|
| |