BMW X3 2010 vs Volvo XC60 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 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: | 184 HP | 185 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
| BMW X3 engine produces 1 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 20 NM less than Volvo XC60. Despite less power, BMW X3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 9.4 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW X3 consumes 2.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60, which means that by driving the BMW X3 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 405 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW X3 consumes 2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 67 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1190 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 1260 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| 900 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 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: | 212 mm (8.3 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: | 330'000 km | 480'000 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 XC60 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X1 | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo XC70 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| BMW X3 2010 2.0 engine: Because of problems with the timing chain, which tends to stretch at 100,000 km, the BMW N47 engine is sometimes called the worst BMW engine. Replacing the timing chain also requires removing the engine from ... More about BMW X3 2010 2.0 engine Volvo XC60 2008 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 XC60 2008 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.71 m | |
| BMW X3 is 2 cm longer than the Volvo XC60, width is practically the same , while the height of BMW X3 is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1600 litres | 1455 litres | |
|
BMW X3 has more luggage capacity. BMW X3 has 55 litres more trunk space than the Volvo XC60. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW X3 (by 145 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X3 is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`300 | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | high | |
| Volvo XC60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW X3 has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Volvo XC60, so Volvo XC60 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 10 800 | 8000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X3 has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |