Mercedes ML 2005 vs Volvo XC90 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
| 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: | 190 HP | 185 HP | |
| Torque: | 440 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Mercedes ML is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes ML engine produces 5 HP more power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Volvo XC90. Thanks to more power Mercedes ML reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.7 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes ML consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mercedes ML could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes ML consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 95 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1260 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| Mercedes ML gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 20 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mercedes E klase, Mercedes R klase | 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: | 4.78 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.91 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.78 m | |
| Mercedes ML is 3 cm shorter than the Volvo XC90, 1 cm wider, while the height of Mercedes ML is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 551 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 551 litres | 613 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1837 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Volvo XC90 has more luggage space (by 62 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes ML is 0.5 metres less than that of the Volvo XC90, which means Mercedes ML can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`830 | 2`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Average price (€): | 5800 | 8400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.3/10 | 8.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes ML has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |