Volvo V70 1997 vs Opel Omega 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.0 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 | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 290 NM | 205 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 16.5 seconds | |
|
Volvo V70 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo V70 engine produces 40 HP more power than Opel Omega, whereas torque is 85 NM more than Opel Omega. Thanks to more power Volvo V70 reaches 100 km/h speed 6.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V70 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V70 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega, which means that by driving the Volvo V70 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V70 consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Opel Omega. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 1040 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 1070 km with real consumption | 970 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 V70) 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 | 460'000 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 V70 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo 850, Volvo S70 | Used also on Opel Vectra | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo V70 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.72 m | 4.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.41 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Volvo V70 is smaller. Volvo V70 is 10 cm shorter than the Opel Omega, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo V70 is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 420 litres | 540 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1580 litres | 1800 litres | |
|
Opel Omega has more luggage space. Volvo V70 has 120 litres less trunk space than the Opel Omega. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Opel Omega (by 220 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V70 is 0.8 metres less than that of the Opel Omega, which means Volvo V70 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`265 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V70 has
|
Opel Omega has
| |