Volvo S60 2001 vs Ford Mondeo 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 1.8 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 177 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.5 seconds | 13.2 seconds | |
|
Volvo S60 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo S60 engine produces 73 HP more power than Ford Mondeo, whereas torque is 163 NM more than Ford Mondeo. Thanks to more power Volvo S60 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
By specification Volvo S60 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mondeo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo S60 could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volvo S60 consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Mondeo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1070 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 1290 km on highway | ||
| 1070 km with real consumption | 910 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo S60 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 280'000 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 S60 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo XC90, Volvo XC70, Volvo C30 | Used also on Ford Escort | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo S60 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volvo S60 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. | |||
| Volvo S60 2001 2.4 engine: These diesel engines are frequently affected by intake manifold swirl flap seizures. This issue often leads to airflow disruptions and rough engine operation.
The actuator for the turbocharger, which relies ... More about Volvo S60 2001 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.58 m | 4.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.37 m | |
|
Volvo S60 is larger. Volvo S60 is 2 cm longer than the Ford Mondeo, 5 cm wider, while the height of Volvo S60 is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 424 litres | 470 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1034 litres | 1290 litres | |
|
Ford Mondeo has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volvo S60 has 46 litres less trunk space than the Ford Mondeo. This could mean that the Volvo S60 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Mondeo (by 256 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo S60 is 0.7 metres more than that of the Ford Mondeo, which means Volvo S60 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`030 | 1`855 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Volvo S60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Mondeo has serious deffects in 175 percent more cases than Volvo S60, so Volvo S60 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 8.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S60 has
|
Ford Mondeo has
| |