Lexus RX 2009 vs Volvo XC90 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.5 Petrol | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Lexus RX) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Volvo XC90) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 277 HP | 185 HP | |
| Torque: | 346 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Lexus RX is more dynamic to drive. Lexus RX engine produces 92 HP more power than Volvo XC90, but torque is 54 NM less than Volvo XC90. Thanks to more power Lexus RX reaches 100 km/h speed 4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.6 | 8.5 | |
|
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Lexus RX consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Lexus RX could require 315 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 72 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 850 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| Volvo XC90 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota RAV4, Toyota Camry, Toyota Sienna, Lexus ES | 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. Lexus RX might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| 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: | 4.74 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Lexus RX is smaller. Lexus RX is 7 cm shorter than the Volvo XC90, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Lexus RX is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 613 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1837 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Lexus RX is 1.1 metres less than that of the Volvo XC90, which means Lexus RX can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`545 | 2`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 12 800 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Lexus RX has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |