Volvo C30 · Facelift 2010
Car comparison
Volvo C30 · Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20VvsVolkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolkswagen Eos
2.0 TSI
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
- Fastest top speed235 km/h146 mph
- 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
- Lightest1,514 kg3,338 lb
- Lowest combined fuel consumption7.7 L/100 km30.5 mpg US36.7 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption10.4 L/100 km22.6 mpg US27.2 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption6.1 L/100 km38.6 mpg US46.3 mpg UK
- Best estimated range714 km444 mi
- Best economy score86/100
Specification comparison
| Model | VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 230hp172kW | 210hp157kW |
| Torque | 320Nm236lb-ft | 280Nm207lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,519kg3,349lb | 1,514kg3,338lb |
| Gross weight | 1,860kg4,101lb | 2,020kg4,453lb |
| Top speed | 235 km/h 146 mph | 234 km/h 145 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 88.1s99% target: 233 km/h / 145 mph Calculated | 98.6s99% target: 232 km/h / 144 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.1s | 7.8s |
| 0-200 km/h | 30.8s Calculated | 34.7s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 6.7s Calculated | 7.4s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 9L/100 km26.1mpg US31.4mpg UK | 7.7L/100 km30.5mpg US36.7mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 13.5L/100 km17.4mpg US20.9mpg UK | 10.4L/100 km22.6mpg US27.2mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 6.5L/100 km36.2mpg US43.5mpg UK | 6.1L/100 km38.6mpg US46.3mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.1s Calculated | 15.6s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 151hp/t113kW/t69hp/1000 lb Calculated | 139hp/t103kW/t63hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 211Nm/t141lb-ft/ton Calculated | 185Nm/t124lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 689km428mi Calculated | 714km444mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 2,521cc154cu in | 1,984cc121cu in |
| Length | 4,266mm168in | 4,407mm174in |
| Width | 1,782mm70in | 1,791mm71in |
| Height | 1,447mm57in | 1,443mm57in |
| Wheelbase | 2,640mm104in | 2,578mm101in |
| Front track | 1,535mm60in | 1,545mm61in |
| Rear track | 1,531mm60in | 1,553mm61in |
| Ground clearance | - | 106mm4in |
| Trunk volume | 278L | 205L |
| Max trunk volume | 921L | 380L |
| Doors | 3 | 2 |
| Seats | 4 | 4 |
| Fuel tank | 62L | 55L |
| 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.
- Volvo C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V: Power / Torque
- Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 5,000 rpm | 1,500-5,000 rpm | 5,250 rpm |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 5,300-6,200 rpm | 1,700-5,200 rpm | 6,450 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 6.7 s | 7.4 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.1 s | 7.8 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 30.8 s | 34.7 s |
| Top speed | 235 km/h 146 mph | 234 km/h 145 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.4 s | 2.5 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.5 s | 6.8 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.8 s | 10.2 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.7 s | 13.2 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.1 s | 15.6 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 152 km/h 95 mph | 147 km/h 92 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 230 hp 172 kW |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 210 hp 157 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 |
|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 280 Nm 207 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 1,519 kg 3,349 lb |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 1,514 kg 3,338 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 235 km/h 146 mph |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 234 km/h 145 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 7.1 s |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 7.8 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 |
|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 9.0 L/100 km 26.1 mpg US 31.4 mpg UK |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 7.7 L/100 km 30.5 mpg US 36.7 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI and Volvo C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V: 1.3 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 151 hp/t 113 kW/t 6.6 kg/hp |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 139 hp/t 103 kW/t 7.2 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 689 km 428 mi |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 714 km 444 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 230 hp 172 kW | 7.1 s | 235 km/h 146 mph |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 210 hp 157 kW | 7.8 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V |
| 9.0 L/100 km 26.1 mpg US 31.4 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI |
| 7.7 L/100 km 30.5 mpg US 36.7 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 |
|---|---|---|
| VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | 9.0 L/100 km 26.1 mpg US 31.4 mpg UK | 7.1 s |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 7.7 L/100 km 30.5 mpg US 36.7 mpg UK | 7.8 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | 139 hp/t 103 kW/t 7.2 kg/hp | 7.7 L/100 km 30.5 mpg US 36.7 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | VolvoC30Facelift 20102.5 T5 20V | VolkswagenEos2.0 TSI | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 230 hp 172 kW | 210 hp 157 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft | 280 Nm 207 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.1 s | 7.8 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 235 km/h 146 mph | 234 km/h 145 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,519 kg 3,349 lb | 1,514 kg 3,338 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 9.0 L/100 km 26.1 mpg US 31.4 mpg UK | 7.7 L/100 km 30.5 mpg US 36.7 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 689 km 428 mi | 714 km 444 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 211 g/km | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 278 L 9.8 cu ft | 205 L 7.2 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 151 hp/t 113 kW/t 6.6 kg/hp | 139 hp/t 103 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 C30 Facelift 2010 2.5 T5 20V | Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 9 L/100 km26.1 mpg US31.4 mpg UK | 7.7 L/100 km30.5 mpg US36.7 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 15.75 LC100 km | 13.48 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 25.35 LC100 mi | 21.69 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,350 L357 US gal297 UK gal | 1,155 L305 US gal254 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,363 LC/year | 2,021 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
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 1 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
- Has 13 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 73 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
Volkswagen Eos 2.0 TSI
- Is 5 kg lighter
- Uses 1.3 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 25 km (16 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























