Volvo S80 1999 vs Opel Omega 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| 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: | 140 HP | 120 HP | |
| Torque: | 290 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
|
Volvo S80 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo S80 engine produces 20 HP more power than Opel Omega, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Opel Omega. Thanks to more power Volvo S80 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 7.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo S80 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo S80 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega, which means that by driving the Volvo S80 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo S80 consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1250 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 1630 km on highway | 1330 km on highway | ||
| 1250 km with real consumption | 1050 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo S80 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Volvo S80) 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 (Opel Omega) 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: | 560'000 km | 440'000 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 S80 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo 850, Volvo S70 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Opel Frontera, Opel Sintra | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo S80 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.82 m | 4.90 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.46 m | |
| Volvo S80 is 8 cm shorter than the Opel Omega, 5 cm wider, while the height of Volvo S80 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 440 litres | 530 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1106 litres | 830 litres | |
| Volvo S80 has 90 litres less trunk space than the Opel Omega. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo S80 (by 276 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`140 | 2`145 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| Volvo S80 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Opel Omega has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Volvo S80, so Volvo S80 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo S80 has
|
Opel Omega has
| |