Audi A6 2008 vs Volvo XC60 2008
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | 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: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 3.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 290 HP | 285 HP | |
| Torque: | 420 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.3 seconds | 7.5 seconds | |
|
Audi A6 is more dynamic to drive. Audi A6 engine produces 5 HP more power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 20 NM more than Volvo XC60. Thanks to more power Audi A6 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.7 | 11.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.3 l/100km | 12.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification Audi A6 consumes 2.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60, which means that by driving the Audi A6 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 330 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Audi A6 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 580 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 780 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 570 km with real consumption | ||
| Audi A6 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 420'000 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 XC60 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 3 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Volvo S80 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo XC60 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Audi A6 2008 3.0 engine: The most notorious issue with this engine is excessive oil consumption caused by scoring in the cylinders. Another common contributor to oil consumption is a defective oil separator, which can also disrupt the ... More about Audi A6 2008 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.93 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.71 m | |
| Audi A6 is 30 cm longer than the Volvo XC60, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Audi A6 is 19 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 565 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1455 litres | |
|
Audi A6 has more luggage capacity. Audi A6 has 70 litres more trunk space than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`470 | 2`440 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Audi A6 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo XC60 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Audi A6, so Audi A6 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6600 | 9000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 7.6/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Audi A6 has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |