Ford Ranger 2015 vs Volvo XC90 2019
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 200 HP | 235 HP | |
| Torque: | 470 NM | 480 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 7.6 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC90 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Ranger engine produces 35 HP less power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Volvo XC90. Due to the lower power, Ford Ranger reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 7.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.0 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Ranger consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Ranger could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Ranger consumes 2.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 71 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 920 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km with real consumption | 850 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.36 m | 4.95 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 2.01 m | |
| Height: | 1.80 m | 1.78 m | |
| Ford Ranger is 41 cm longer than the Volvo XC90, 15 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Ranger is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 368 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 2`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 35 200 | 49 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Ranger has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |