Chevrolet Astro 1985 vs Volvo XC90 2005
Body: | Minivan / MPV | Crossover / SUV | |
---|---|---|---|
Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
Engine: | 4.3 Petrol | 4.4 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 167 HP | 315 HP | |
Torque: | 319 NM | 440 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 7.3 seconds | |
Chevrolet Astro engine produces 148 HP less power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 121 NM less than Volvo XC90. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.1 | 14.0 | |
The Chevrolet Astro is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chevrolet Astro consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that by driving the Chevrolet Astro over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 102 litres | 80 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 570 km in combined cycle | |
Chevrolet Astro gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.49 m | 4.80 m | |
Width: | 1.97 m | 1.90 m | |
Height: | 1.94 m | 1.74 m | |
Chevrolet Astro is 31 cm shorter than the Volvo XC90, 7 cm wider, while the height of Chevrolet Astro is 20 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | no data | 249 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2404 litres | |
Turning diameter: | no data | 12.7 meters | |
Gross weight (kg): | 2`699 | 2`760 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | no data | low | |
Average price (€): | 3200 | 4200 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Astro has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |