2006 Saab 9-2 vs 2011 Volvo V50
📊 Key Differences
- Fuel economy: 22 MPG vs 24 MPG combined — Volvo V50 is more efficient
- Annual fuel cost: $2700 vs $2500 — Volvo V50 saves $ per year
- Fuel type: Regular Gasoline vs Regular Gasoline
| Specification | 2006 Saab 9-2 | 2011 Volvo V50 |
|---|---|---|
| Year | 2006 | 2011 |
| Class | Small Station Wagons | Small Station Wagons |
| Fuel Type | Regular Gasoline | Regular Gasoline |
| Drive | 4-Wheel or All-Wheel Drive | Front-Wheel Drive |
| Transmission | Automatic 4-spd | Automatic (S5) |
| Cylinders | 4 | 5 |
| Displacement (L) | 2.5 | 2.5 |
| City MPG | 19 | 21 |
| Highway MPG | 25 | 30 |
| Combined MPG | 22 | 24 |
| Annual Fuel Cost | $2700 | $2500 |
| CO₂ (g/mile) | 403.95454545454544 | 370.2916666666667 |
🚗 2006 Saab 9-2
Small Station Wagons with 22 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. 4-Wheel or All-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Saab 9-2 Profile →🚗 2011 Volvo V50
Small Station Wagons with 24 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. Front-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Volvo V50 Profile →🔗 Related