Citroen Xantia 1998 vs Volvo V90 1997
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Citroen Xantia is available with front wheel drive, while Volvo V90 can be equipped with rear wheel drive. | |||
Engines: | 1.8 - 2.1 (petrol, diesel) | 2.9 - 3.0 (petrol) | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 75 - 150 HP | 180 - 204 HP | |
Torque: | 135 - 250 NM | 260 - 267 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 - 18 seconds | 9.2 - 9.4 seconds | |
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.7 - 10.3 | 11.0 - 11.7 | |
Citroen Xantia petrol engines consumes on average 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than Volvo V90. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.71 m | 4.86 m | |
Width: | 1.76 m | 1.75 m | |
Height: | 1.42 m | 1.45 m | |
Citroen Xantia is 15 cm shorter than the Volvo V90, 1 cm wider, while the height of Citroen Xantia is 3 cm lower. | |||
Trunk capacity: | no data | 992 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1702 litres | |
Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 9.7 meters | |
The turning circle of the Citroen Xantia is 1.7 metres more than that of the Volvo V90, which means Citroen Xantia can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`450 | ~ 2`100 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | above average | no data | |
Average price (€): | 1000 | 2200 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xantia has
|
Volvo V90 has
| |