2009 Mercury Sable vs. 2010 Volvo C30
To start off, 2010 Volvo C30 is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2009 Mercury Sable. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2009 Mercury Sable would be higher. At 3,496 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Mercury Sable is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Mercury Sable weights approximately 475 kg more than 2010 Volvo C30.
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. 2009 Mercury Sable has automatic transmission and 2010 Volvo C30 has manual transmission. 2010 Volvo C30 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Mercury Sable will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mercury Sable | 2010 Volvo C30 | |
| Make | Mercury | Volvo |
| Model | Sable | C30 |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3496 cc | 1600 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 263 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | 6-speed manual |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1926 kg | 1451 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5140 mm | 4252 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1900 mm | 1783 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1570 mm | 1448 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2870 mm | 2639 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 8.4 L/100km | 3.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 78 L | 60 L |
