Nissan Murano 2011 vs Volvo XC90 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Double-row 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: | 450 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Nissan Murano is more dynamic to drive. Nissan Murano engine produces 5 HP more power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 50 NM more than Volvo XC90. Thanks to more power Nissan Murano reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 8.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.8 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Murano is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Nissan Murano consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that by driving the Nissan Murano over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Nissan Murano consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 82 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1020 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 930 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
| Nissan Murano gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volvo XC90 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 26 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Navara, Nissan Pathfinder | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volvo XC90 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.86 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.78 m | |
| Nissan Murano is 5 cm longer than the Volvo XC90, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Nissan Murano is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 402 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 402 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 211 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Nissan Murano is 0.7 metres less than that of the Volvo XC90, which means Nissan Murano can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`495 | 2`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 9200 | 9000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Nissan Murano has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |