Volvo XC90 2014 vs BMW X5 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 320 HP | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 450 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.9 seconds | 8.2 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC90 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo XC90 engine produces 102 HP more power than BMW X5, but torque is 50 NM less than BMW X5. Thanks to more power Volvo XC90 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.9 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC90 consumes 1.9 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 285 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC90 consumes 3.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 71 litres | 75 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 920 km in combined cycle | 1290 km in combined cycle | |
| 590 km with real consumption | 930 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: | 238 mm (9.4 inches) | 209 mm (8.2 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: | 360'000 km | 280'000 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: | 9 years | 17 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo S60, Volvo XC60, Volvo S90, Volvo V90 | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X1 | |
| 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: | 4.95 m | 4.89 m | |
| Width: | 2.01 m | 1.94 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.76 m | |
|
Volvo XC90 is larger. Volvo XC90 is 6 cm longer than the BMW X5, 7 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC90 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 615 litres | 650 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1886 litres | 1870 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Volvo XC90 has 35 litres less trunk space than the BMW X5. This could mean that the Volvo XC90 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC90 (by 16 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 12.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC90 is 0.8 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`750 | 2`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 27 600 | 29 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC90 has
|
BMW X5 has
| |