2009 Mazda 5 vs. 2008 Volvo C70
To start off, 2009 Mazda 5 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2008 Volvo C70. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2008 Volvo C70 would be higher. At 2,319 cc (5 cylinders), 2008 Volvo C70 is equipped with a bigger engine.
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, 2008 Volvo C70 (330 Nm @ 2400 RPM) has 129 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Mazda 5. (201 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2008 Volvo C70 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Mazda 5.
Compare all specifications:
2009 Mazda 5 | 2008 Volvo C70 | |
Make | Mazda | Volvo |
Model | 5 | C70 |
Year Released | 2009 | 2008 |
Body Type | Minivan | Coupe |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2260 cc | 2319 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 154 HP | 0 HP |
Torque | 201 Nm | 330 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 2400 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 87.5 mm | 81 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 94 mm | 90 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.0:1 | 8.5:1 |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 6 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4620 mm | 4250 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1840 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1640 mm | 1550 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2670 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 9.8 L/100km | 10.1 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 68 L |