HomeArticlesProductsKeywordsCompanies

Compare Alpina B6 E64 vs Chevrolet Camaro 6 Convertible vs Volvo C70 Convertible

Variants
B6
B6 S
2.0 AT
2.0T
2.0T AT
3.6
3.6 AT
6.2
6.2 AT
ZL1
ZL1 AT
2.0T 180
2.0T 225
2.0T 225 AT
2.0T 163
T5 239
T5 245
2.4T 200
2.5
2.5 AT
2.5T

Capacity

Cargo Capacity
450 L / 15.9 cu-ft
206 L / 7.3 cu-ft
Engine Oil Capacity
5.8 L / 6.1 qt
Fuel Capacity
70.0 L / 18.5 gal
72.0 L / 19.0 gal
Passengers
4
4
4
Payload
260 kg / 573 lbs

Chassis

Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Ventilated discs
Disc
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Hydraulic Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Multi-link
Multi-link
Semi-independent, Torsion

Construction

Body Style
2-door Convertible
2-door Convertible
2-door Convertible

Dimensions

Size | Height
1371 mm / 54.0 in
Size | Length
4820 mm / 189.8 in
Size | Width
1855 mm / 73.0 in
Track Width | Front
1558.0 mm / 61.3 in
1520.0 mm / 59.8 in
Track Width | Rear
1598.0 mm / 62.9 in
1520.0 mm / 59.8 in
Weight
1930.0 kg / 4254.9 lbs
Wheelbase
2780 mm / 109.4 in
2811 mm / 110.7 in
2660 mm / 104.7 in

Performance

Coefficient Of Drag
0.37
Fuel Economy
18.9 L/100km / 12.4 MPG (combined) | 22.6 L/100km / 10.4 MPG (urban) | 9.3 L/100km / 25.3 MPG (highway)

Powertrain

Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (longitudinal), Rear-wheel drive
Front-engine (longitudinal), Rear-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 4
Euro 6 b
Engine | Bore
92.0 mm / 3.6 in
Engine | Compression Ratio
9.0:1
Engine | Displacement
4.4 L / 268.4 cu-in / 4398.0 cc
Engine | Stroke
82.7 mm / 3.3 in
Engine | Type
Supercharged multi-port injected petrol V8 DOHC engine with 4 values per cylinder
Transmission | Gears
6-speed
Transmission | Type
Automatic

Reviews

Neofiliac score
87%
80%
28%
Pros
  • Superb elegance and styling
  • Good performance
  • Decent handling
  • Decent performance
  • Affordable way to get a big V8
  • Sounds great
  • Characterful I5 engines
  • No diesel nonsense
  • Reliable drivetrain
Cons
  • Very high fuel consumption
  • Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
  • Build quality concerns
  • High 0.37 drag coefficient
  • Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
  • Low cargo capacity
  • Ugly with the top up and down
  • Low cargo capacity
  • Poor suspension setup

Price

Offers (incl. referral links)
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.