Volvo S60 2010 vs Audi A3 2008
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 203 HP | 200 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.7 seconds | 7.1 seconds | |
| Volvo S60 engine produces 3 HP more power than Audi A3, whereas torque is 20 NM more than Audi A3. Despite the higher power, Volvo S60 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.6 l/100km | 8.8 l/100km | |
|
The Audi A3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo S60 consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi A3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo S60 could require 165 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo S60 consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi A3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 68 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 620 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo S60 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 1 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo XC60, Volvo V60 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat CC, Volkswagen Beetle, Audi TT | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Audi A3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Audi A3 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: | 4.63 m | 4.29 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Volvo S60 is larger. Volvo S60 is 34 cm longer than the Audi A3, 11 cm wider, while the height of Volvo S60 is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 380 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1104 litres | |
| Volvo S60 has 10 litres more trunk space than the Audi A3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo S60 is 0.6 metres more than that of the Audi A3, which means Volvo S60 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`040 | 1`895 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Audi A3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo S60 has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Audi A3, so Audi A3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6400 | 5600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S60 has
|
Audi A3 has
| |