Volvo S70

Volvo S70: which version to buy (1997–2000)

If you want the fastest S70 in this catalogue, buy 2.3 MT at 250 hp: 6.7 s to 100 km/h and 250 km/h. If you want the lightest car for the power, that same 2.3 MT 250 hp is 5.88 kg/hp (kerb 1470 kg). If you want the densest engine, buy 2.0 MT 226 hp: 113.9 hp per litre from 1984 cm³.

If you want the fastest S70 in this catalogue, buy 2.3 MT at 250 hp: 6.7 s to 100 km/h and 250 km/h. If you want the lightest car for the power, that same 2.3 MT 250 hp is 5.88 kg/hp (kerb 1470 kg). If you want the densest engine, buy 2.0 MT 226 hp: 113.9 hp per litre from 1984 cm³. If you want a gearbox that does not steal much time, 2.0 AT 226 hp is only 0.1 s slower than 2.0 MT 226 hp (7.8 s vs 7.7 s). If you want the only Automatic with a measured fuel figure, buy 2.4 AT 193 hp (16.8 / 8.5 / 11.5 L/100 km city / highway / mixed). There is no later generation to “wait for”: production is 1997-01-01 to 2000-12-31, body Sedan, drive FWD on every listed car.

Generations: one window, twenty names, twelve compared here

1 generation is the whole model. Years: 1997–2000. Body: Sedan. The catalogue counts 20 modifications; 12 are shown below. Chassis numbers that do not change between versions: fuel tank 60 L, ground clearance 140 mm, front brakes Ventilated disc, rear brakes Disc, front and rear suspension Independent, spring, engine placement Front, transverse, cylinders 5, layout Inline, fuel system Distributed injection (multi-point), fuel type Gasoline. Eco class is not measured. CO2 is not measured.

There is no restyling generation and no second body. The buying choice is engine output, boost (No vs Turbo), gearbox (Manual 5 vs Automatic 4), and whether consumption was measured.

Engines and specs

Same catalogue names appear more than once. Distinguish them by horsepower.

Power per litre (hp ÷ displacement in litres): 2.0 MT/2.0 AT 126 hp = 63.5 hp/L; 2.4 MT 144 hp = 59.1 hp/L (lowest); 2.4 MT 170 hp = 69.8 hp/L; 2.4 MT/2.4 AT 193 hp = 79.3 hp/L; 2.0 MT/2.0 AT 180 hp = 90.7 hp/L; 2.3 MT 240 hp = 103.5 hp/L; 2.3 MT 250 hp = 107.8 hp/L; 2.0 MT/2.0 AT 226 hp = 113.9 hp/L (highest). The 1984 cm³ Turbo at 226 hp out-extracts the larger 2319 cm³ and 2435 cm³ engines on this metric.

Compression: 8.4 on all 1984 cm³ cars; 8.5 on both 2.3 MT; 9 on 2.4 Turbo 193 hp; 10 on 2.4 MT 144 hp; 10.3 on 2.4 MT 170 hp. Bore × stroke: 81 × 77 on 2.0; 81 × 90 on 2.3; 83 × 90 on 2.4. The 2.4 MT 144 hp is the only listed engine with 2 valves per cylinder; every other version has 4.

Performance and economy (0–100, top speed, mpg)

0–100 km/h in this set runs from 6.7 s (2.3 MT 250 hp) to 11.7 s (2.0 MT 126 hp and 2.0 AT 126 hp) — a 4.0 s gap. Top speed runs from 195 km/h (both 126 hp 2.0) to 250 km/h (2.3 MT 250 hp) — a 55 km/h gap.

Full sprint and speed list:

• 2.0 MT 126 hp: 11.7 s, 195 km/h; city / highway / mixed not measured
• 2.0 AT 126 hp: 11.7 s, 195 km/h; consumption not measured
• 2.4 MT 144 hp: 10.2 s, 205 km/h; 14.2 / 8.0 / 10.0 L/100 km
• 2.0 AT 180 hp: 10.0 s, 215 km/h; consumption not measured
• 2.0 MT 180 hp: 9.3 s, 215 km/h; consumption not measured
• 2.4 MT 170 hp: 8.9 s, 210 km/h; consumption not measured
• 2.4 AT 193 hp: 8.2 s, 220 km/h; 16.8 / 8.5 / 11.5 L/100 km
• 2.0 AT 226 hp: 7.8 s, 230 km/h; consumption not measured
• 2.4 MT 193 hp: 7.8 s, 225 km/h; consumption not measured
• 2.0 MT 226 hp: 7.7 s, 240 km/h; consumption not measured
• 2.3 MT 240 hp: 7.0 s, 245 km/h; 16.2 / 8.2 / 9.6 L/100 km
• 2.3 MT 250 hp: 6.7 s, 250 km/h; consumption not measured

Manual versus Automatic, same power:

• 126 hp: 2.0 MT and 2.0 AT share 11.7 s and 195 km/h. The Automatic adds 10 kg (1430 vs 1420).
• 180 hp: 2.0 AT is 0.7 s slower than 2.0 MT (10.0 vs 9.3); top speed is the same 215 km/h. Again +10 kg.
• 226 hp: 2.0 AT is 0.1 s slower (7.8 vs 7.7) but 10 km/h slower at the top (230 vs 240). Kerb weight is the same 1395 kg.
• 193 hp: 2.4 AT is 0.4 s slower than 2.4 MT (8.2 vs 7.8) and 5 km/h slower (220 vs 225). Kerb weight is the same 1460 kg.

What the next step of power buys on 1984 cm³:

• No boost 126 hp → Turbo 180 hp: +54 hp, +50 Nm, −2.4 s (11.7 to 9.3 on Manual), +20 km/h. Peak torque moves from 4800 rpm to 2100 rpm.
• Turbo 180 hp → Turbo 226 hp Manual: +46 hp, +90 Nm, −1.6 s (9.3 to 7.7), +25 km/h. Fuel grade changes from 95 to 98. Kerb weight drops 25 kg (1420 to 1395).

On 2435 cm³:

• 2.4 MT 144 hp (2 valves) → 2.4 MT 170 hp (4 valves): +26 hp, +24 Nm, −1.3 s, +5 km/h. Kerb weight drops 54 kg (1430 to 1376).
• 2.4 MT 170 hp → 2.4 MT 193 hp Turbo: +23 hp, +40 Nm, −1.1 s, +15 km/h. Kerb weight rises 84 kg (1376 to 1460). Torque peak falls from 4700 rpm to 1800 rpm.

On 2319 cm³, 2.3 MT 250 hp versus 2.3 MT 240 hp: +10 hp, +20 Nm, −0.3 s, +5 km/h, +10 kg. That is the smallest power step in the table and the only pair that shares the 2.3 MT name.

Measured economy exists on three versions only. 2.4 MT 144 hp is the lowest mixed figure at 10.0 L/100 km. 2.3 MT 240 hp is 0.4 L/100 km lower on mixed than that sounds like a loss, wait: 9.6 mixed vs 10.0 — the 240 hp Turbo is 0.4 L/100 km better mixed than the 144 hp NA, but 2.0 L/100 km worse in the city (16.2 vs 14.2). 2.4 AT 193 hp is the thirstiest measured car: mixed 11.5, city 16.8 — 1.9 L/100 km more mixed than 2.4 MT 144 hp, and 1.5 more mixed than 2.3 MT 240 hp. Do not infer mpg for the other nine: they are not measured.

Dimensions and weight

Ground clearance is 140 mm on all twelve. Tank is 60 L on all twelve. Gross weight is 1890 kg on the 126 hp, 180 hp, and 2.4 MT 144 hp cars; 1910 kg on 2.3 MT both outputs and on 2.4 193 hp both gearboxes; 1950 kg on 2.0 226 hp both gearboxes and on 2.4 MT 170 hp.

Kerb weight range: 1376 kg (2.4 MT 170 hp, lightest) to 1470 kg (2.3 MT 250 hp, heaviest) — 94 kg.

kg per hp (kerb ÷ hp):

• 2.3 MT 250 hp: 5.88
• 2.3 MT 240 hp: 6.08
• 2.0 MT / 2.0 AT 226 hp: 6.17
• 2.4 MT / 2.4 AT 193 hp: 7.56
• 2.0 MT 180 hp: 7.89; 2.0 AT 180 hp: 7.94
• 2.4 MT 170 hp: 8.09
• 2.4 MT 144 hp: 9.93
• 2.0 MT 126 hp: 11.27; 2.0 AT 126 hp: 11.35 (worst)

Wheels: 2.0 126 hp and 2.4 MT 170 hp list 185/65 R15, 195/60 R15, 205/55 R15. Turbo 2.0 180 hp and 226 hp, 2.3 MT 250 hp, and 2.4 193 hp list 205/55 R15, 205/50 R16, 205/45 R17. Wheel sizes for 2.3 MT 240 hp and 2.4 MT 144 hp are not measured.

Payload (gross − kerb): 2.4 MT 170 hp 574 kg (1950 − 1376); 2.0 226 hp 555 kg (1950 − 1395); 2.0 AT 126 hp 460 kg; 2.3 MT 250 hp 440 kg. The lightest NA 2.4 carries the most extra mass in this arithmetic.

Which version to choose

Buy 2.3 MT 250 hp if the job is the shortest 0–100 and the highest top speed: 6.7 s, 250 km/h, 350 Nm at 2400 rpm, 107.8 hp/L. It is 0.3 s and 5 km/h ahead of 2.3 MT 240 hp, at +10 kg. Consumption for the 250 hp car is not measured; the 240 hp sibling’s 16.2 / 8.2 / 9.6 is the nearest measured Turbo-manual figure, not a substitute.

Buy 2.3 MT 240 hp if you want that Turbo 2319 cm³ engine and a published mixed 9.6 L/100 km. Versus 2.0 MT 226 hp you give up 1.4 s wait no: 7.0 vs 7.7 — you gain 0.7 s and 5 km/h (245 vs 240) while using 95 instead of 98, at +65 kg (1460 vs 1395). Versus 2.4 MT 193 hp you gain 0.8 s and 20 km/h.

Buy 2.0 MT 226 hp if you want the highest specific output and a Manual that is essentially as quick as the 2.3s in a straight line: 7.7 s, 240 km/h, 310 Nm, 113.9 hp/L, kerb 1395 kg. It is 0.1 s quicker than 2.0 AT 226 hp and 10 km/h faster. It is 0.1 s quicker than 2.4 MT 193 hp despite 451 cm³ less displacement. The cost in the data is fuel grade 98 (every other listed version is 95) and consumption not measured.

Buy 2.0 AT 226 hp if you want Automatic 4 with almost no sprint penalty: +0.1 s, same 226 hp and 310 Nm, same 1395 kg. You lose 10 km/h of top speed (230 vs 240). Among Automatics this is the fastest 0–100 (7.8 s), 2.4 s quicker than 2.0 AT 126 hp and 2.2 s quicker than 2.0 AT 180 hp.

Buy 2.4 MT 193 hp if you want Turbo torque at the lowest rpm in the table: 270 Nm at 1800 rpm, 7.8 s, 225 km/h, fuel 95. It matches 2.0 AT 226 hp to 100 km/h exactly (7.8 s) with 33 hp less. Versus 2.4 AT 193 hp you save 0.4 s and 5 km/h. Consumption not measured.

Buy 2.4 AT 193 hp if Automatic is required and you also need a measured mpg line: 8.2 s, 220 km/h, 16.8 / 8.5 / 11.5. It is the only Automatic with economy figures. It is 1.5 s slower than 2.0 AT 226 hp and 3.5 s faster than 2.0 AT 126 hp.

Buy 2.0 MT 180 hp if you want Turbo on 1984 cm³ without 98 fuel: 9.3 s, 215 km/h, 220 Nm at 2100 rpm, 95. Versus NA 2.0 MT 126 hp you gain 54 hp and 2.4 s. Versus 2.0 MT 226 hp you give up 46 hp and 1.6 s. 2.0 AT 180 hp is the Automatic twin: 10.0 s, same 215 km/h, +10 kg.

Buy 2.4 MT 170 hp if you want the lightest S70 here (1376 kg) without a Turbo: 8.9 s, 210 km/h, 4 valves, compression 10.3, wheels 185/65 R15 / 195/60 R15 / 205/55 R15. It is 1.3 s quicker than 2.4 MT 144 hp and 0.4 s quicker than 2.0 MT 180 hp despite 10 hp less — the 54 kg gap versus the 144 hp car and the 44 kg gap versus 2.0 MT 180 hp (1420 kg) is the arithmetic. Consumption not measured. Gross 1950 kg gives 574 kg of payload, the largest in this set.

Buy 2.4 MT 144 hp if you want the only 2-valve engine and the lowest measured city figure (14.2 L/100 km) plus mixed 10.0. It is 1.5 s slower than 2.4 MT 170 hp and 1.5 s quicker than 2.0 MT 126 hp. Wheels not measured. This is the weakest specific output (59.1 hp/L).

Buy 2.0 MT 126 hp or 2.0 AT 126 hp only if you explicitly want the smallest output: 126 hp, 170 Nm at 4800 rpm, 11.7 s, 195 km/h, boost No. Manual and Automatic are equal on sprint and speed; Automatic is 10 kg heavier. Both sit at about 11.3 kg/hp. Consumption not measured. They share the smaller wheel set with 2.4 MT 170 hp.

Problems and reliability. The data does not list failure rates, service intervals, or known defects. What it does list as absent: consumption on nine of twelve versions; CO2 on all twelve; eco class on all twelve; wheels on 2.3 MT 240 hp and 2.4 MT 144 hp. Treat those as not measured, not as zero.

Short map. Fastest and densest chassis: 2.3 MT 250 hp. Fastest Automatic: 2.0 AT 226 hp. Highest hp/L and 98-octane Turbo-four-valve 1984 cm³: 2.0 MT 226 hp. Lightest NA: 2.4 MT 170 hp. Measured mixed under 10 L/100 km: only 2.3 MT 240 hp at 9.6. Measured Automatic: only 2.4 AT 193 hp. There is no second generation to prefer; the spread is 126–250 hp and 6.7–11.7 s inside 1 generation.