Volvo S80 2006 vs Mercedes E class 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 2.7 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
|
Mercedes E class is a more dynamic driving. Volvo S80 engine produces 14 HP less power than Mercedes E class, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Mercedes E class. Due to the lower power, Volvo S80 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo S80 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Volvo S80 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes E class, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo S80 could require 60 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volvo S80 consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes E class. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 970 km in combined cycle | 950 km in combined cycle | |
| 1220 km on highway | 1220 km on highway | ||
| 950 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
| 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 (Mercedes E class) 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. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 148 mm (5.8 inches) | 145 mm (5.7 inches) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.85 m | 4.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Volvo S80 is larger. Volvo S80 is 3 cm longer than the Mercedes E class, 4 cm wider, while the height of Volvo S80 is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 480 litres | 540 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 540 litres | |
|
Mercedes E class has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volvo S80 has 60 litres less trunk space than the Mercedes E class. This could mean that the Volvo S80 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo S80 is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mercedes E class, which means Volvo S80 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`200 | 2`200 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 3000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Mercedes E klase has
| |