Volvo XC90 2006 vs BMW X5 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.4 Petrol | 4.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 315 HP | 355 HP | |
| Torque: | 440 NM | 475 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.3 seconds | 6.5 seconds | |
|
BMW X5 is a more dynamic driving. Volvo XC90 engine produces 40 HP less power than BMW X5, whereas torque is 35 NM less than BMW X5. Due to the lower power, Volvo XC90 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.5 | 12.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 13.9 l/100km | 14.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Volvo XC90 consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC90 could require 225 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volvo XC90 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 85 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 590 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 810 km on highway | 920 km on highway | ||
| 570 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 218 mm (8.6 inches) | 222 mm (8.7 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 700'000 km | 460'000 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: | 5 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo S80 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 7 sērija, BMW 6 sērija | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The BMW X5 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: | 4.81 m | 4.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.93 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.77 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Volvo XC90 is 4 cm shorter than the BMW X5, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo XC90 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 249 litres | 620 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 249 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 613 litres | 620 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1837 litres | 1750 litres | |
| In 5-seat version BMW X5 has more luggage space (by 7 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC90 (by 87 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.5 meters | 13 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC90 is 0.5 metres less than that of the BMW X5, which means Volvo XC90 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`770 | 2`785 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| BMW X5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo XC90 has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than BMW X5, so BMW X5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 9000 | 9800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.9/10 | 8.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC90 has
|
BMW X5 has
| |