Volkswagen Eos
Car comparison
Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSIvsVolvo C30 · Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolvo C30 · Facelift 2010
2.5 T5 20V
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Volvo C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V
- Quickest 0-100 km/h7.1 s
- Most powerful230 hp172 kW
- Highest torque320 Nm236 lb-ft
- Best power-to-weight151 hp/t113 kW/t6.6 kg/hp
- Largest trunk278 L
- Best overall score53/100
- Best performance score54/100
- Best practicality score50/100
Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI
- Fastest top speed236 km/h147 mph
- Lightest1,497 kg3,300 lb
- Lowest combined fuel consumption7.2 L/100 km32.7 mpg US39.2 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption9.7 L/100 km24.2 mpg US29.1 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption5.7 L/100 km41.3 mpg US49.6 mpg UK
- Best estimated range764 km475 mi
- Best economy score87/100
Specification comparison
| Model | VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 210hp157kW | 230hp172kW |
| Torque | 280Nm207lb-ft | 320Nm236lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,497kg3,300lb | 1,519kg3,349lb |
| Gross weight | 2,000kg4,409lb | 1,860kg4,101lb |
| Top speed | 236 km/h 147 mph | 235 km/h 146 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 98.8s99% target: 234 km/h / 145 mph Calculated | 87.4s99% target: 233 km/h / 145 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.8s | 7.1s |
| 0-200 km/h | 33.9s Calculated | 30.7s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.4s Calculated | 6.7s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 7.2L/100 km32.7mpg US39.2mpg UK | 9L/100 km26.1mpg US31.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 9.7L/100 km24.2mpg US29.1mpg UK | 13.5L/100 km17.4mpg US20.9mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 5.7L/100 km41.3mpg US49.6mpg UK | 6.5L/100 km36.2mpg US43.5mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.6s Calculated | 15.1s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 140hp/t105kW/t64hp/1000 lb Calculated | 151hp/t113kW/t69hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 187Nm/t125lb-ft/ton Calculated | 211Nm/t141lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 764km475mi Calculated | 689km428mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,984cc121cu in | 2,521cc154cu in |
| Length | 4,407mm174in | 4,266mm168in |
| Width | 1,791mm71in | 1,782mm70in |
| Height | 1,443mm57in | 1,447mm57in |
| Wheelbase | 2,578mm101in | 2,640mm104in |
| Front track | 1,545mm61in | 1,535mm60in |
| Rear track | 1,553mm61in | 1,531mm60in |
| Ground clearance | 106mm4in | - |
| Trunk volume | 205L | 278L |
| Max trunk volume | 380L | 921L |
| Doors | 2 | 3 |
| Seats | 4 | 4 |
| Fuel tank | 55L | 62L |
| CO2 emissions | - | 211g/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.
- Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI: Power / Torque
- Volvo C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 5,300-6,200 rpm | 1,700-5,200 rpm | 6,450 rpm |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 5,000 rpm | 1,500-5,000 rpm | 5,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.4 s | 6.7 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.8 s | 7.1 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 33.9 s | 30.7 s |
| Top speed | 236 km/h 147 mph | 235 km/h 146 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.5 s | 2.5 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.8 s | 6.5 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.2 s | 9.8 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.2 s | 12.7 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.6 s | 15.1 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 148 km/h 92 mph | 152 km/h 95 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 210 hp 157 kW |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 230 hp 172 kW |
Volvo C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V has 20 hp more than Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI.
The biggest power difference is between Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI and Volvo C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V: 20 hp (15 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 280 Nm 207 lb-ft |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 1,497 kg 3,300 lb |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 1,519 kg 3,349 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 236 km/h 147 mph |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 235 km/h 146 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 7.8 s |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 7.1 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V and Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI: 0.7 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 7.2 L/100 km 32.7 mpg US 39.2 mpg UK |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 9.0 L/100 km 26.1 mpg US 31.4 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI and Volvo C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V: 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 |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 140 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 kg/hp |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 151 hp/t 113 kW/t 6.6 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 764 km 475 mi |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 689 km 428 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 210 hp 157 kW | 7.8 s | 236 km/h 147 mph |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 230 hp 172 kW | 7.1 s | 235 km/h 146 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI |
| 7.2 L/100 km 32.7 mpg US 39.2 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V |
| 9.0 L/100 km 26.1 mpg US 31.4 mpg UK | ||||||
Volvo C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V 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 |
|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 7.2 L/100 km 32.7 mpg US 39.2 mpg UK | 7.8 s |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 9.0 L/100 km 26.1 mpg US 31.4 mpg UK | 7.1 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 |
|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 140 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 kg/hp | 7.2 L/100 km 32.7 mpg US 39.2 mpg UK |
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 151 hp/t 113 kW/t 6.6 kg/hp | 9.0 L/100 km 26.1 mpg US 31.4 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 210 hp 157 kW | 230 hp 172 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 280 Nm 207 lb-ft | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.8 s | 7.1 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 236 km/h 147 mph | 235 km/h 146 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,497 kg 3,300 lb | 1,519 kg 3,349 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 7.2 L/100 km 32.7 mpg US 39.2 mpg UK | 9.0 L/100 km 26.1 mpg US 31.4 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 764 km 475 mi | 689 km 428 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | - | 211 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 205 L 7.2 cu ft | 278 L 9.8 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 140 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 kg/hp | 151 hp/t 113 kW/t 6.6 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 | Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI | Volvo C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 7.2 L/100 km32.7 mpg US39.2 mpg UK | 9 L/100 km26.1 mpg US31.4 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 12.60 LC100 km | 15.75 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 20.28 LC100 mi | 25.35 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,080 L285 US gal238 UK gal | 1,350 L357 US gal297 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,890 LC/year | 2,363 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI
- Is 22 kg lighter
- Has 1 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 1.8 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 75 km (47 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Smallest trunk
Volvo C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V
- Has 20 hp more
- Has 40 Nm more
- Is 0.7 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 11 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 73 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























