Volvo XC70 2013 vs Mazda 6 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 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: | 215 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 440 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.3 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC70 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo XC70 engine produces 65 HP more power than Mazda 6, whereas torque is 60 NM more than Mazda 6. Thanks to more power Volvo XC70 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 4.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC70 consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC70 could require 300 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC70 consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1090 km in combined cycle | 1400 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 1630 km on highway | ||
| 890 km with real consumption | 1030 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 460'000 km | 380'000 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 XC70 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo XC60 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda CX-7 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 6 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volvo XC70 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.84 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.60 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Volvo XC70 is larger. Volvo XC70 is 4 cm longer than the Mazda 6, 2 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC70 is 12 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 575 litres | 502 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1600 litres | no data | |
|
Volvo XC70 has more luggage capacity. Volvo XC70 has 73 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 6. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.5 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC70 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Mazda 6. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`400 | 2`090 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | below average | |
| Volvo XC70 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Mazda 6 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Volvo XC70, so Volvo XC70 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 13 800 | 7400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC70 has
|
Mazda 6 has
| |