2016 Volvo S80 vs 2002 Mazda 626
📊 Key Differences
- Fuel economy: 29 MPG vs 25 MPG combined — Volvo S80 is more efficient
- Annual fuel cost: $2050 vs $2400 — Volvo S80 saves $ per year
- Fuel type: Regular Gasoline vs Regular Gasoline
| Specification | 2016 Volvo S80 | 2002 Mazda 626 |
|---|---|---|
| Year | 2016 | 2002 |
| Class | Midsize Cars | Midsize Cars |
| Fuel Type | Regular Gasoline | Regular Gasoline |
| Drive | Front-Wheel Drive | Front-Wheel Drive |
| Transmission | Automatic (S8) | Manual 5-spd |
| Cylinders | 4 | 4 |
| Displacement (L) | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| City MPG | 25 | 23 |
| Highway MPG | 37 | 29 |
| Combined MPG | 29 | 25 |
| Annual Fuel Cost | $2050 | $2400 |
| CO₂ (g/mile) | 308.0 | 355.48 |
| EPA Fuel Economy Score | 7/10 | —/10 |
| EPA GHG Score | 7/10 | —/10 |
🚗 2016 Volvo S80
Midsize Cars with 29 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. Front-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Volvo S80 Profile →🚗 2002 Mazda 626
Midsize Cars with 25 MPG combined fuel economy. Runs on Regular Gasoline. Front-Wheel Drive drivetrain.
Full Mazda 626 Profile →🔗 Related