Volvo V70 2005 vs Mazda 6 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 185 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 310 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 10.7 seconds | |
|
Volvo V70 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo V70 engine produces 49 HP more power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 90 NM more than Mazda 6. Thanks to more power Volvo V70 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V70 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo V70 could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V70 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 64 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 950 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 1180 km on highway | ||
| 940 km with real consumption | 920 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: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 370'000 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: | 5 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo XC70, Volvo XC60 | Used also on Mazda MPV | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volvo V70 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. | |||
| Volvo V70 2005 2.4 engine: The early versions of these engines are known for their reliability and rare failures, which made them popular.
However, engine have several common weaknesses. Intake manifold swirl flaps often seize, and ... More about Volvo V70 2005 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.71 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.51 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Volvo V70 is larger. Volvo V70 is 2 cm longer than the Mazda 6, 2 cm wider, while the height of Volvo V70 is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 485 litres | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1641 litres | 1712 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Volvo V70 has 20 litres less trunk space than the Mazda 6. This could mean that the Volvo V70 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 6 (by 71 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo V70 is 1.1 metres more than that of the Mazda 6, which means Volvo V70 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`220 | 2`010 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | average | |
| Volvo V70 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Mazda 6, so Volvo V70 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.1/10 | 6.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V70 has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |