BMW X6 2008 vs Volvo XC90 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 4.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 286 HP | 315 HP | |
| Torque: | 580 NM | 440 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.9 seconds | 7.3 seconds | |
|
BMW X6 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X6 engine produces 29 HP less power than Volvo XC90, but torque is 140 NM more than Volvo XC90. Despite less power, BMW X6 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 13.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.1 l/100km | 13.9 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW X6 consumes 5.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that by driving the BMW X6 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 780 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW X6 consumes 2.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 85 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1020 km in combined cycle | 590 km in combined cycle | |
| 1190 km on highway | 810 km on highway | ||
| 760 km with real consumption | 570 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 212 mm (8.3 inches) | 218 mm (8.6 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 700'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volvo XC90 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW X5, BMW 7 sērija, BMW X3 | Used also on Volvo S80 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X6 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The BMW X6 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.88 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.98 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.78 m | |
|
BMW X6 is larger, but lower. BMW X6 is 7 cm longer than the Volvo XC90, 8 cm wider, while the height of BMW X6 is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 570 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 570 litres | 613 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1450 litres | 1837 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Volvo XC90 has more luggage space (by 43 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC90 (by 387 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.8 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X6 is 0.3 metres more than that of the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`710 | 2`770 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Average price (€): | 15 200 | 9000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X6 has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |