Kia Carnival 2006 vs Volvo XC90 2006
| 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: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.9 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 185 HP | 185 HP | |
| Torque: | 343 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 11 seconds | |
| Kia Carnival and Volvo XC90 have the same engine power, but Kia Carnival torque is 57 NM less than Volvo XC90. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.7 l/100km | 9.4 l/100km | |
|
The Kia Carnival is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Kia Carnival consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that by driving the Kia Carnival over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Kia Carnival consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1020 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 1250 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 910 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Kia Carnival gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Hyundai Terracan | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC70, Volvo XC60 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Volvo XC90 2006 2.4 engine: The early versions of these engines are known for their reliability and rare failures, which made them popular.
However, engine have several common weaknesses. Intake manifold swirl flaps often seize, and ... More about Volvo XC90 2006 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.81 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.98 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.78 m | |
| Kia Carnival and Volvo XC90 are practically the same length. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 364 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 364 litres | 613 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1666 litres | 1837 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Volvo XC90 has more luggage space (by 249 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC90 (by 171 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia Carnival is 0.9 metres less than that of the Volvo XC90, which means Kia Carnival can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`900 | 2`740 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | low | |
| Volvo XC90 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Kia Carnival has serious deffects in 115 percent more cases than Volvo XC90, so Volvo XC90 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia Carnival has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |