Volvo C30
Car comparison
Volvo C30 2.5 i 20V T5vsMazda RX-8 1.3 Wankel
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonMazda RX-8
1.3 Wankel
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Volvo C30 2.5 i 20V T5
- Fastest top speed235 km/h146 mph
- Highest torque320 Nm236 lb-ft
- Lowest combined fuel consumption9.4 L/100 km25.0 mpg US30.1 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption12.6 L/100 km18.7 mpg US22.4 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption6.4 L/100 km36.8 mpg US44.1 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions224 g/km
- Best estimated range660 km410 mi
- Best overall score52/100
- Best economy score82/100
- Best practicality score48/100
Mazda RX-8 1.3 Wankel
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.4 s
- Most powerful231 hp172 kW
- Lightest1,379 kg3,040 lb
- Best power-to-weight168 hp/t125 kW/t6.0 kg/hp
- Largest trunk290 L
- Best performance score55/100
Specification comparison
| Model | VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 220hp164kW | 231hp172kW |
| Torque | 320Nm236lb-ft | 211Nm156lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,437kg3,168lb | 1,379kg3,040lb |
| Gross weight | 1,860kg4,101lb | 1,815kg4,001lb |
| Top speed | 235 km/h 146 mph | 234 km/h 145 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 87.7s99% target: 233 km/h / 145 mph Calculated | 72.6s99% target: 232 km/h / 144 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.1s | 6.4s |
| 0-200 km/h | 30.7s Calculated | 26.7s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 6.7s Calculated | 6.1s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 9.4L/100 km25mpg US30.1mpg UK | 11.2L/100 km21mpg US25.2mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 12.6L/100 km18.7mpg US22.4mpg UK | 15.6L/100 km15.1mpg US18.1mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 6.4L/100 km36.8mpg US44.1mpg UK | 8.7L/100 km27mpg US32.5mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.1s Calculated | 14.5s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 153hp/t114kW/t69hp/1000 lb Calculated | 168hp/t125kW/t76hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 223Nm/t149lb-ft/ton Calculated | 153Nm/t102lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 660km410mi Calculated | 545km338mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 2,521cc154cu in | 1,308cc80cu in |
| Length | 4,252mm167in | 4,430mm174in |
| Width | 1,782mm70in | 1,770mm70in |
| Height | 1,447mm57in | 1,340mm53in |
| Wheelbase | 2,640mm104in | 2,700mm106in |
| Front track | 1,548mm61in | 1,500mm59in |
| Rear track | 1,544mm61in | 1,505mm59in |
| Ground clearance | - | 140mm6in |
| Trunk volume | 233L | 290L |
| Doors | 3 | 2 |
| Seats | 4 | 4 |
| Fuel tank | 62L | 61L |
| CO2 emissions | 224g/km | 284g/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 C30 2.5 i 20V T5: Power / Torque
- Mazda RX-8 1.3 Wankel: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 5,000 rpm | 1,500-4,800 rpm | 5,250 rpm |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 8,200 rpm | 5,500 rpm | 9,000 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 6.7 s | 6.1 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.1 s | 6.4 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 30.7 s | 26.7 s |
| Top speed | 235 km/h 146 mph | 234 km/h 145 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.5 s | 2.4 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.5 s | 6.3 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.8 s | 9.5 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.7 s | 12.2 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.1 s | 14.5 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 152 km/h 95 mph | 159 km/h 99 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 220 hp 164 kW |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 231 hp 172 kW |
Mazda RX-8 1.3 Wankel has 11 hp more than Volvo C30 2.5 i 20V T5.
The biggest power difference is between Volvo C30 2.5 i 20V T5 and Mazda RX-8 1.3 Wankel: 11 hp (8 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 211 Nm 156 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 1,437 kg 3,168 lb |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 1,379 kg 3,040 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 235 km/h 146 mph |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 234 km/h 145 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 7.1 s |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 6.4 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Mazda RX-8 1.3 Wankel and Volvo C30 2.5 i 20V T5: 0.7 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 11.2 L/100 km 21.0 mpg US 25.2 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volvo C30 2.5 i 20V T5 and Mazda RX-8 1.3 Wankel: 1.8 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 153 hp/t 114 kW/t 6.5 kg/hp |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 168 hp/t 125 kW/t 6.0 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 660 km 410 mi |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 545 km 338 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 220 hp 164 kW | 7.1 s | 235 km/h 146 mph |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 231 hp 172 kW | 6.4 s | 234 km/h 145 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 |
| 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | ||||||
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel |
| 11.2 L/100 km 21.0 mpg US 25.2 mpg UK | ||||||
Volvo C30 2.5 i 20V T5 is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.
Acceleration vs fuel consumption
Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | 7.1 s |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 11.2 L/100 km 21.0 mpg US 25.2 mpg UK | 6.4 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | 153 hp/t 114 kW/t 6.5 kg/hp | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK |
| MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | 168 hp/t 125 kW/t 6.0 kg/hp | 11.2 L/100 km 21.0 mpg US 25.2 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | VolvoC302.5 i 20V T5 | MazdaRX-81.3 Wankel | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 220 hp 164 kW | 231 hp 172 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft | 211 Nm 156 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.1 s | 6.4 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 235 km/h 146 mph | 234 km/h 145 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,437 kg 3,168 lb | 1,379 kg 3,040 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | 11.2 L/100 km 21.0 mpg US 25.2 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 660 km 410 mi | 545 km 338 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 224 g/km | 284 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 233 L 8.2 cu ft | 290 L 10.2 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 153 hp/t 114 kW/t 6.5 kg/hp | 168 hp/t 125 kW/t 6.0 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 C30 2.5 i 20V T5 | Mazda RX-8 1.3 Wankel |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 9.4 L/100 km25 mpg US30.1 mpg UK | 11.2 L/100 km21 mpg US25.2 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 16.45 LC100 km | 19.60 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 26.47 LC100 mi | 31.54 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,410 L372 US gal310 UK gal | 1,680 L444 US gal370 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,468 LC/year | 2,940 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Volvo C30 2.5 i 20V T5
- Has 109 Nm more
- Has 1 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 1.8 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 115 km (71 mi) more estimated range
- Emits 60 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Heaviest
- Smallest trunk
Mazda RX-8 1.3 Wankel
- Has 11 hp more
- Is 58 kg lighter
- Is 0.7 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 14 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 57 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Most powerful
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Lowest top speed
- Highest CO2 emissions
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























