Chevrolet Astro 1992 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: | 204 HP | 315 HP | |
Torque: | 353 NM | 440 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 7.3 seconds | |
Chevrolet Astro engine produces 111 HP less power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 87 NM less than Volvo XC90. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.0 | 14.0 | |
The Chevrolet Astro is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Chevrolet Astro consumes 1 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 150 litres of fuel. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 102 litres | 80 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 780 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): | no data | 2`760 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | no data | low | |
Average price (€): | 3200 | 4200 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Astro has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |