Volvo 960 1994 vs Volvo V70 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.9 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 204 HP | 210 HP | |
| Torque: | 267 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 7.8 seconds | |
|
Volvo V70 is a more dynamic driving. Volvo 960 engine produces 6 HP less power than Volvo V70, whereas torque is 53 NM less than Volvo V70. Due to the lower power, Volvo 960 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.1 | 10.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.0 l/100km | 10.0 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V70 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo 960 consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo 960 could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo 960 consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V70. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 660 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V70 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo V70) 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 (Volvo 960) 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 420'000 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 Volvo 960 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volvo S90, Volvo V90 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo XC70 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo V70 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volvo 960 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: | 4.86 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.49 m | |
| Volvo 960 is 15 cm longer than the Volvo V70, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo 960 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 992 litres | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2125 litres | 1641 litres | |
|
Volvo 960 has more luggage capacity. Volvo 960 has 507 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V70. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo 960 (by 484 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo 960 is 1.1 metres less than that of the Volvo V70, which means Volvo 960 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`060 | 2`100 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo 960 has
|
Volvo V70 has
| |