Mercedes ML 2005 vs Volvo XC90 2002
| 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: | 224 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 510 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.6 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Mercedes ML is more dynamic to drive. Mercedes ML engine produces 61 HP more power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 170 NM more than Volvo XC90. Thanks to more power Mercedes ML reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 9.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.8 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mercedes ML consumes 0.3 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 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mercedes ML consumes 1.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 95 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 1260 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 870 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Mercedes ML 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 9 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Mercedes G klase | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC70, Volvo C30 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes ML might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mercedes ML 2005 3.0 engine: A reliable yet dynamic engine. Frequent oil leaks, engine crankcase ventilation problems. Volvo XC90 2002 2.4 engine: These diesel engines are frequently affected by intake manifold swirl flap seizures. This issue often leads to airflow disruptions and rough engine operation. The actuator for the turbocharger, which relies ... More about Volvo XC90 2002 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.78 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.91 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.74 m | |
| Mercedes ML is 2 cm shorter than the Volvo XC90, 1 cm wider, while the height of Mercedes ML is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 551 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2050 litres | 2404 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, The Volvo XC90 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC90 (by 354 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 12.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mercedes ML is 0.7 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: | 2`830 kg | 2`735 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Average price (€): | 5000 | 3200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.3/10 | 9.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mercedes ML has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |