Compare Chevrolet Camaro 6 Convertible vs Volvo C70 Convertible
Variants
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
206 L / 7.3 cu-ft
Engine Oil Capacity
5.8 L / 6.1 qt
Fuel Capacity
72.0 L / 19.0 gal
Passengers
4
4
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Ventilated discs
Disc
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Hydraulic Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Multi-link
Semi-independent, Torsion
Construction
Body Style
2-door Convertible
2-door Convertible
Dimensions
Track Width | Front
1520.0 mm / 59.8 in
Track Width | Rear
1520.0 mm / 59.8 in
Wheelbase
2811 mm / 110.7 in
2660 mm / 104.7 in
Performance
Coefficient Of Drag
0.37
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (longitudinal), Rear-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 6 b
Reviews
Neofiliac score
80%
28%
Pros
- Decent performance
- Affordable way to get a big V8
- Sounds great
- Characterful I5 engines
- No diesel nonsense
- Reliable drivetrain
Cons
- 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
Remove
Remove
Related Products
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.