BMW X5 2018 vs Volvo XC90 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 340 HP | 320 HP | |
| Torque: | 450 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 5.5 seconds | 6.9 seconds | |
|
BMW X5 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X5 engine produces 20 HP more power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 50 NM more than Volvo XC90. Thanks to more power BMW X5 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.8 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.6 l/100km | 11.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification BMW X5 consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW X5 could require 165 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, BMW X5 consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 83 litres | 71 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 940 km in combined cycle | 920 km in combined cycle | |
| 710 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 214 mm (8.4 inches) | 238 mm (9.4 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volvo XC90 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 360'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 7 sērija, BMW 1 sērija | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo S60, Volvo XC60, Volvo S90, Volvo V90 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X5 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.92 m | 4.95 m | |
| Width: | 2.00 m | 2.01 m | |
| Height: | 1.75 m | 1.78 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. BMW X5 is 3 cm shorter than the Volvo XC90, width is practically the same , while the height of BMW X5 is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 645 litres | 615 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1860 litres | 1886 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, BMW X5 has 30 litres more trunk space than the Volvo XC90. The Volvo XC90 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC90 (by 26 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.6 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X5 is 0.7 metres more than that of the Volvo XC90, which means BMW X5 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`800 | 2`750 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volvo XC90 scores higher in safety tests. The Volvo XC90 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 60 400 | 27 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X5 has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |