Audi Q5 2012 vs Volvo XC60 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 245 HP | 304 HP | |
| Torque: | 580 NM | 440 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.5 seconds | 7.3 seconds | |
|
Audi Q5 is more dynamic to drive. Audi Q5 engine produces 59 HP less power than Volvo XC60, but torque is 140 NM more than Volvo XC60. Despite less power, Audi Q5 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 10.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.7 l/100km | 11.1 l/100km | |
|
The Audi Q5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi Q5 consumes 4.3 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 645 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi Q5 consumes 2.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1170 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 1250 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 860 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi Q5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 390'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Audi A7 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC70, Volvo V60 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo XC60 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.71 m | |
| Audi Q5 is 2 cm shorter than the Volvo XC60, width is practically the same , while the height of Audi Q5 is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 540 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1560 litres | 1455 litres | |
|
Audi Q5 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Audi Q5 has 45 litres more trunk space than the Volvo XC60. The Volvo XC60 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 Audi Q5 (by 105 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi Q5 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`470 | 2`440 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Audi Q5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo XC60 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Audi Q5, so Audi Q5 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 26 400 | 15 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi Q5 has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |