2013 Volvo C70 vs 2012 Saab 9-3
📊 Key Differences
- Fuel economy: 22 MPG vs 24 MPG combined — Saab 9-3 is more efficient
- Annual fuel cost: $2700 vs $2500 — Saab 9-3 saves $ per year
- Fuel type: Regular Gasoline vs Regular Gasoline
| Specification | 2013 Volvo C70 | 2012 Saab 9-3 |
|---|---|---|
| Year | 2013 | 2012 |
| Class | Subcompact Cars | Compact Cars |
| Fuel Type | Regular Gasoline | Regular Gasoline |
| Drive | Front-Wheel Drive | Front-Wheel Drive |
| Transmission | Automatic (S5) | Manual 6-spd |
| Cylinders | 5 | 4 |
| Displacement (L) | 2.5 | 2.0 |
| City MPG | 19 | 20 |
| Highway MPG | 27 | 32 |
| Combined MPG | 22 | 24 |
| Annual Fuel Cost | $2700 | $2500 |
| CO₂ (g/mile) | 400.0 | 370.2916666666667 |
| EPA Fuel Economy Score | 5/10 | —/10 |
| EPA GHG Score | 5/10 | —/10 |
🚗 2013 Volvo C70
Subcompact Cars with 22 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. Front-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Volvo C70 Profile →🚗 2012 Saab 9-3
Compact Cars with 24 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. Front-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Saab 9-3 Profile →🔗 Related