Volvo V70 II · Facelift 2004
Car comparison
Volvo V70 II · Facelift 2004 2.5TvsRenault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V GT
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonRenault Laguna II Grandtour
2.0 i 16V GT
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Volvo V70 II Facelift 2004 2.5T
- Quickest 0-100 km/h7.8 s
- Fastest top speed235 km/h146 mph Unrestricted225 km/h140 mph Restricted
- Most powerful210 hp157 kW
- Highest torque320 Nm236 lb-ft
- Lowest city consumption14.4 L/100 km16.3 mpg US19.6 mpg UK
- Largest trunk485 L
- Best overall score61/100
- Best performance score51/100
- Best economy score80/100
- Best practicality score83/100
Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V GT
- Lightest1,465 kg3,230 lb
- Best power-to-weight139 hp/t104 kW/t7.2 kg/hp
- Lowest highway consumption7.5 L/100 km31.4 mpg US37.7 mpg UK
Specification comparison
| Model | VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T | RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 210hp157kW | 204hp152kW |
| Torque | 320Nm236lb-ft | 300Nm221lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,595kg3,516lb | 1,465kg3,230lb |
| Gross weight | 2,130kg4,696lb | 2,095kg4,619lb |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 235 km/h146 mph Restricted 225 km/h140 mph Calculated | 232 km/h 144 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 77.7s99% target: 233 km/h / 145 mph Calculated | 77.8s99% target: 230 km/h / 143 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.8s | 8.2s |
| 0-200 km/h | 29.8s Calculated | 31.5s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.4s Calculated | 7.8s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 10.1L/100 km23.3mpg US28.0mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption city | 14.4L/100 km16.3mpg US19.6mpg UK | 14.8L/100 km15.9mpg US19.1mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 7.7L/100 km30.5mpg US36.7mpg UK | 7.5L/100 km31.4mpg US37.7mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.6s Calculated | 15.9s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 132hp/t98kW/t60hp/1000 lb Calculated | 139hp/t104kW/t63hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 201Nm/t134lb-ft/ton Calculated | 205Nm/t137lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 693km431mi Calculated | - |
| Displacement | 2,521cc154cu in | 1,998cc122cu in |
| Length | 4,710mm185in | 4,695mm185in |
| Width | 1,804mm71in | 1,772mm70in |
| Height | 1,465mm58in | 1,443mm57in |
| Wheelbase | 2,755mm108in | 2,740mm108in |
| Front track | 1,551mm61in | 1,525mm60in |
| Rear track | 1,548mm61in | 1,480mm58in |
| Trunk volume | 485L | 475L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,641L | 1,500L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 70L | 70L |
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 V70 II Facelift 2004 2.5T: Power / Torque
- Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V GT: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T | 5,000 rpm | 1,500-4,500 rpm | 5,250 rpm |
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT | 5,000 rpm | 3,000 rpm | 5,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T | RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.4 s | 7.8 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.8 s | 8.2 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 29.8 s | 31.5 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 235 km/h146 mph Restricted 225 km/h140 mph Likely limited | 232 km/h 144 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.7 s | 2.8 s |
330 ft 101 m | 7.0 s | 7.1 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.3 s | 10.6 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.2 s | 13.5 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.6 s | 15.9 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 153 km/h 95 mph | 151 km/h 94 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T | 210 hp 157 kW |
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT | 204 hp 152 kW |
Volvo V70 II Facelift 2004 2.5T has 6 hp more than Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V GT.
The biggest power difference is between Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V GT and Volvo V70 II Facelift 2004 2.5T: 6 hp (4 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft |
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT | 300 Nm 221 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T | 1,595 kg 3,516 lb |
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT | 1,465 kg 3,230 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T | Unrestricted 235 km/h146 mph Restricted 225 km/h140 mph |
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT | 232 km/h 144 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T | 7.8 s |
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT | 8.2 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo V70 II Facelift 2004 2.5T and Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V GT: 0.4 s.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T | 132 hp/t 98 kW/t 7.6 kg/hp |
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT | 139 hp/t 104 kW/t 7.2 kg/hp |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T | 210 hp 157 kW | 7.8 s | Unrestricted 235 km/h146 mph Restricted 225 km/h140 mph |
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT | 204 hp 152 kW | 8.2 s | 232 km/h 144 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | VolvoV70 IIFacelift 20042.5T | RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V GT | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 210 hp 157 kW | 204 hp 152 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft | 300 Nm 221 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.8 s | 8.2 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 235 km/h146 mph Restricted 225 km/h140 mph | 232 km/h 144 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,595 kg 3,516 lb | 1,465 kg 3,230 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 10.1 L/100 km 23.3 mpg US 28.0 mpg UK | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 693 km 431 mi | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 485 L 17.1 cu ft | 475 L 16.8 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 132 hp/t 98 kW/t 7.6 kg/hp | 139 hp/t 104 kW/t 7.2 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 V70 II Facelift 2004 2.5T |
|---|---|
| Consumption | 10.1 L/100 km23.3 mpg US28 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 17.68 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 28.45 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,515 L400 US gal333 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,651 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Volvo V70 II Facelift 2004 2.5T
- Has 6 hp more
- Has 20 Nm more
- Is 0.4 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 3 km/h (2 mph) higher top speed
- Has 10 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Heaviest
Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V GT
- Is 130 kg lighter
- Has 8 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























