Audi Q7 2006 vs Volvo XC90 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 233 HP | 185 HP | |
| Torque: | 500 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.1 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Audi Q7 is more dynamic to drive. Audi Q7 engine produces 48 HP more power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 100 NM more than Volvo XC90. Thanks to more power Audi Q7 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.5 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.8 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Audi Q7 consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Audi Q7 could require 300 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Audi Q7 consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 950 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 840 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi Q7 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 500'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 2 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC70, Volvo XC60 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo XC90 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Volvo XC90 2006 2.4 engine: The early versions of these engines are known for their reliability and rare failures, which made them popular.
However, engine have several common weaknesses. Intake manifold swirl flaps often seize, and ... More about Volvo XC90 2006 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.09 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.98 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Audi Q7 is larger, but slightly lower. Audi Q7 is 28 cm longer than the Volvo XC90, 8 cm wider, while the height of Audi Q7 is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 775 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 775 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 613 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2035 litres | 1837 litres | |
| In 7-seat version Audi Q7 has more luggage space (by 526 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Audi Q7 (by 198 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Audi Q7 is 0.5 metres less than that of the Volvo XC90, which means Audi Q7 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`990 | 2`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Audi Q7 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo XC90 has serious deffects in 100 percent more cases than Audi Q7, so Audi Q7 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7000 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi Q7 has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |