Volvo S80 · Facelift 2003
Car comparison
Volvo S80 · Facelift 2003 2.9 T6 24VvsHyundai Centennial 4.5 V8
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonHyundai Centennial
4.5 V8
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Volvo S80 Facelift 2003 2.9 T6 24V
- Quickest 0-100 km/h7.2 s
- Fastest top speed260 km/h162 mph Unrestricted250 km/h155 mph Restricted
- Most powerful272 hp203 kW
- Lightest1,615 kg3,560 lb
- Best power-to-weight168 hp/t126 kW/t5.9 kg/hp
- Lowest city consumption16.2 L/100 km14.5 mpg US17.4 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption8.4 L/100 km28.0 mpg US33.6 mpg UK
- Best overall score64/100
- Best performance score59/100
- Best economy score77/100
Hyundai Centennial 4.5 V8
- Highest torque381 Nm281 lb-ft
- Best practicality score78/100
Specification comparison
| Model | VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V | HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 272hp203kW | 270hp201kW |
| Torque | 380Nm280lb-ft | 381Nm281lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,615kg3,560lb | 1,990kg4,387lb |
| Gross weight | 2,120kg4,674lb | - |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Calculated | Unrestricted 245 km/h152 mph Restricted 230 km/h143 mph Calculated |
| To 99% top speed | 72.0s99% target: 257 km/h / 160 mph Calculated | 87.0s99% target: 243 km/h / 151 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.2s | 8.5s |
| 0-200 km/h | 22.3s Calculated | 29.9s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 6.9s Calculated | 8.1s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 11.3L/100 km20.8mpg US25.0mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption city | 16.2L/100 km14.5mpg US17.4mpg UK | 17L/100 km13.8mpg US16.6mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 8.4L/100 km28mpg US33.6mpg UK | 10L/100 km23.5mpg US28.2mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.0s Calculated | 16.1s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 168hp/t126kW/t76hp/1000 lb Calculated | 136hp/t101kW/t62hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 235Nm/t157lb-ft/ton Calculated | 191Nm/t128lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 708km440mi Calculated | - |
| Displacement | 2,922cc178cu in | 4,498cc274cu in |
| Length | 4,822mm190in | 5,065mm199in |
| Width | 1,832mm72in | 1,870mm74in |
| Height | 1,452mm57in | 1,465mm58in |
| Wheelbase | 2,791mm110in | 2,830mm111in |
| Front track | 1,570mm62in | 1,615mm64in |
| Rear track | 1,548mm61in | 1,615mm64in |
| Trunk volume | 460L | - |
| Max trunk volume | 1,126L | - |
| Doors | 4 | 4 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 80L | 80L |
| CO2 emissions | 272g/km | - |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Dyno simulation
Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.
- Volvo S80 Facelift 2003 2.9 T6 24V: Power / Torque
- Hyundai Centennial 4.5 V8: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V | 5,200 rpm | 1,800-5,000 rpm | 5,450 rpm |
| HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 | 5,000 rpm | 3,500 rpm | 5,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V | HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 6.9 s | 8.1 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.2 s | 8.5 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 22.3 s | 29.9 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph Likely limited | Unrestricted 245 km/h152 mph Restricted 230 km/h143 mph Likely limited |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.8 s | 2.9 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.9 s | 7.3 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.1 s | 10.8 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.8 s | 13.7 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.0 s | 16.1 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 164 km/h 102 mph | 151 km/h 94 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V | 272 hp 203 kW |
| HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 | 270 hp 201 kW |
Volvo S80 Facelift 2003 2.9 T6 24V has 2 hp more than Hyundai Centennial 4.5 V8.
The biggest power difference is between Hyundai Centennial 4.5 V8 and Volvo S80 Facelift 2003 2.9 T6 24V: 2 hp (1 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V | 380 Nm 280 lb-ft |
| HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 | 381 Nm 281 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V | 1,615 kg 3,560 lb |
| HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 | 1,990 kg 4,387 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 | Unrestricted 245 km/h152 mph Restricted 230 km/h143 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V | 7.2 s |
| HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 | 8.5 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo S80 Facelift 2003 2.9 T6 24V and Hyundai Centennial 4.5 V8: 1.3 s.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V | 168 hp/t 126 kW/t 5.9 kg/hp |
| HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 | 136 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V | 272 hp 203 kW | 7.2 s | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph |
| HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 | 270 hp 201 kW | 8.5 s | Unrestricted 245 km/h152 mph Restricted 230 km/h143 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | VolvoS80Facelift 20032.9 T6 24V | HyundaiCentennial4.5 V8 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 272 hp 203 kW | 270 hp 201 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 380 Nm 280 lb-ft | 381 Nm 281 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.2 s | 8.5 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 260 km/h162 mph Restricted 250 km/h155 mph | Unrestricted 245 km/h152 mph Restricted 230 km/h143 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,615 kg 3,560 lb | 1,990 kg 4,387 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 11.3 L/100 km 20.8 mpg US 25.0 mpg UK | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 708 km 440 mi | - | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 272 g/km | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 460 L 16.2 cu ft | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 168 hp/t 126 kW/t 5.9 kg/hp | 136 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | Volvo S80 Facelift 2003 2.9 T6 24V |
|---|---|
| Consumption | 11.3 L/100 km20.8 mpg US25 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 19.78 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 31.82 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,695 L448 US gal373 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,966 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Volvo S80 Facelift 2003 2.9 T6 24V
- Has 2 hp more
- Is 375 kg lighter
- Is 1.3 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 15 km/h (9 mph) higher top speed
- Has 33 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Hyundai Centennial 4.5 V8
- Has 1 Nm more
Pros
- Highest torque
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























