Volvo S60 2010 vs Mazda 3 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 203 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.2 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Volvo S60 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo S60 engine produces 98 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 155 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Volvo S60 reaches 100 km/h speed 4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 6.3 | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volvo S60 consumes 2.4 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 360 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 68 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| Mazda 3 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 | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo XC60, Volvo V60 | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.58 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.47 m | |
|
Volvo S60 is larger. Volvo S60 is 5 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 11 cm wider, while the height of Volvo S60 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 380 litres | 430 litres | |
|
Mazda 3 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volvo S60 has 50 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: | 11.3 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo S60 is 0.9 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Volvo S60 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`060 | 1`745 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | high | |
| Volvo S60 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda 3, so Volvo S60 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 7400 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S60 has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |