BMW X5 2003 vs Volvo XC90 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 3.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 231 HP | 243 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.3 seconds | 9.5 seconds | |
| BMW X5 engine produces 12 HP less power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 20 NM less than Volvo XC90. Despite less power, BMW X5 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.0 | 11.5 | |
|
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. BMW X5 consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW X5 could require 225 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 93 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 203 mm (8 inches) | 218 mm (8.6 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: | 460'000 km | 500'000 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: | 7 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 7 sērija, BMW X3, BMW Z4 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80 | |
| 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: | 4.67 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.91 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.78 m | |
|
BMW X5 is smaller. BMW X5 is 14 cm shorter than the Volvo XC90, 4 cm narrower, while the height of BMW X5 is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 465 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 465 litres | 613 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1550 litres | 1837 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Volvo XC90 has more luggage space (by 148 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC90 (by 287 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X5 is 0.5 metres less than that of the Volvo XC90, which means BMW X5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`595 | 2`760 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Average price (€): | 5400 | 9000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.5/10 | 8.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X5 has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |