2006 Mazda 3 vs. 2009 Volvo S60
To start off, 2009 Volvo S60 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Mazda 3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Mazda 3 would be higher. At 2,401 cc (5 cylinders), 2009 Volvo S60 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Volvo S60 (258 HP @ 5500 RPM) has 108 more horse power than 2006 Mazda 3. (150 HP @ 6500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Volvo S60 should accelerate faster than 2006 Mazda 3.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Volvo S60 (350 Nm @ 2100 RPM) has 167 more torque (in Nm) than 2006 Mazda 3. (183 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2009 Volvo S60 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2006 Mazda 3.
Compare all specifications:
2006 Mazda 3 | 2009 Volvo S60 | |
Make | Mazda | Volvo |
Model | 3 | S60 |
Year Released | 2006 | 2009 |
Body Type | Sedan | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1999 cc | 2401 cc |
Horse Power | 150 HP | 258 HP |
Engine RPM | 6500 RPM | 5500 RPM |
Torque | 183 Nm | 350 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 2100 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 4 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4540 mm | 4610 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1810 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1470 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2650 mm | 2720 mm |
Fuel Consumption | 6.7 L/100km | 9.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption City | 8.4 L/100km | 13.1 L/100km |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 7.6 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 68 L |