Compare two cars

Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion

Car #1
Make
Model
Variant
Engine
Car #2
Make
Model
Variant
Engine

compare selected cars
2004. - 2007.
C - Small family car
wagon, 5 door
front
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
2006. - 2010.
C - Small family car
wagon, 5 door
front

Dimensons & Outlines

4514 mm
1770 mm
1452 mm
417 liters
1307 liters
55 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
4470 mm
1790 mm
1525 mm
534 liters
1664 liters
53 liters
2004 Volvo V50
2006 KIA Ceed Sporty Wagon

Check vehicle history

Engine

Peugeot / Ford
2.0 DW10 BTED4 / RHR
Diesel
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Turbo
1997 cc
136 hp
340 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
Diesel
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Turbo
1991 cc
140 hp
304 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

manual gearbox - 6 gears
1379 kg
9.6 s
210 km/h
7.6 l/100km
4.6 l/100km
5.7 l/100km
153 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
manual gearbox - 6 gears
1413 kg
10.5 s
205 km/h
7.6 l/100km
4.5 l/100km
5.6 l/100km
149 g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km

Expenses

2200 EUR
Price from
3000 EUR

Virtual Adviser's™ opinion

Overview

Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the small family car segment and utilize the same 5-door wagon body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific diesel engine choice they offer. The first one has a Peugeot-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 136hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 140hp engine designed by Hyundai.

Safety

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the small family car segment, which is generally classifying them somewhere in the middle safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Korean car offers a marginal difference of 2% more metal.

Reliability

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Volvo with an average rating of 3.2, and models under the KIA badge with 4.2 out of 5. Independent research findings rank V50 as average reliability-wise, and Ceed is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the Swedish car rank it on average as 4.3, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.7 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Volvo is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.9 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 210 kilometers per hour, 5km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.7 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (50 mpg), in combined cycle.


Verdict

KIA appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the Korean car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. From there things take a different direction, with Volvo being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say KIA. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.

Related articles

author: AutoManiac date: 2016-05-16

Back in the 80's it was virtually impossible to describe any Volvo car without using insanely high number of superlatives. The MOST safe, the MOST reliable, the MOST comfortable... Still, they were puzzled on how to reach to a young drivers' hearts, creating the MOST interesting...

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

49worldwide automotive brands
1.661different vehicle models
2.384engines
14.865specific cars