Volvo 850 1996 vs Opel Omega 1994
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 290 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Volvo 850 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo 850 engine produces 10 HP more power than Opel Omega, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Opel Omega. Thanks to more power Volvo 850 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo 850 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo 850 consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega, which means that by driving the Volvo 850 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo 850 consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 73 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1100 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 1400 km on highway | 1220 km on highway | ||
| 1100 km with real consumption | 900 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo 850 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
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 (Opel Omega) 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: | 4.67 m | 4.79 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Volvo 850 is smaller. Volvo 850 is 12 cm shorter than the Opel Omega, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo 850 is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 445 litres | 530 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 830 litres | |
|
Opel Omega has more luggage space. Volvo 850 has 85 litres less trunk space than the Opel Omega. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo 850 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Opel Omega, which means Volvo 850 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`960 | 2`170 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Volvo 850 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Omega has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Volvo 850, so Volvo 850 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo 850 has
|
Opel Omega has
| |