Volvo S60 2004 vs Mazda 3 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 187 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Volvo S60 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo S60 engine produces 20 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 43 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Volvo S60 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.0 | 7.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.7 l/100km | 9.0 l/100km | |
|
By specification Volvo S60 consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo S60 could require 165 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 Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 850 km on highway | ||
| 800 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo S60 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 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 S60 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S40, Volvo V50, Volvo S70 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Mazda 6, Mazda MX-5, Mazda 5, Mazda CX-5 | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.58 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Volvo S60 is larger, but slightly lower. Volvo S60 is 9 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 5 cm wider, while the height of Volvo S60 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 424 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1034 litres | no data | |
| Despite its longer length, Volvo S60 has 6 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 3. This could mean that the Volvo S60 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo S60 is 0.6 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Volvo S60 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`980 | 1`770 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 3600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S60 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |