Audi Q5 2009 vs Volvo XC60 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Petrol | 3.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 270 HP | 285 HP | |
| Torque: | 330 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.9 seconds | 7.5 seconds | |
| Audi Q5 engine produces 15 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 70 NM less than Volvo XC60. Despite less power, Audi Q5 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.3 | 11.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.3 l/100km | 12.2 l/100km | |
|
The Audi Q5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi Q5 consumes 2.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60, which means that by driving the Audi Q5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 390 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi Q5 consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 580 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 780 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 570 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi Q5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
| Ground clearance: | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | 230 mm (9.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volvo XC60 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volvo XC60 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. | |||
| Audi Q5 2009 3.2 engine: This engine continues to suffer from a range of reliability concerns, many of which stem from cost-cutting on materials. One recurring issue involves low-grade gaskets used in critical areas like valve covers, ... More about Audi Q5 2009 3.2 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.65 m | 1.71 m | |
| Audi Q5 and Volvo XC60 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1560 litres | 1455 litres | |
|
Audi Q5 has more luggage capacity. Audi Q5 has 45 litres more trunk space than the Volvo XC60. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Audi Q5 (by 105 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi Q5 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`415 | 2`440 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Audi Q5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo XC60 has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Audi Q5, so Audi Q5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 10 000 | 8800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi Q5 has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |