Chrysler Voyager 1988 vs Volvo XC90 2006
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Body: | Minivan / MPV | 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: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Chrysler Voyager is available only with front wheel drive, while Volvo XC90 can be equipped with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. | |||
| Engines: | 2.5 - 3.0 (petrol) | 2.4 - 4.4 (petrol, diesel) | |
| Both cars are available with petrol engines. Volvo XC90 is available also with diesel engines. Diesel engines typically offer better fuel efficiency and higher torque compared to other engine types. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 97 - 141 HP | 163 - 315 HP | |
| Torque: | 179 - 228 NM | 320 - 440 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 - 15.2 seconds | 7.3 - 12 seconds | |
| In general, Volvo XC90 are available with more powerful and dynamic engines than Chrysler Voyager. Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.6 - 10.7 | 8.2 - 13.5 | |
|
Chrysler Voyager petrol engines consumes on average 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than Volvo XC90. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.91 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.77 m | |
|
Chrysler Voyager is smaller. Chrysler Voyager is 33 cm shorter than the Volvo XC90, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Chrysler Voyager is 13 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1837 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 13.1 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chrysler Voyager is 0.6 metres more than that of the Volvo XC90, which means Chrysler Voyager can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | ~ 1`500 kg | ~ 2`735 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Chrysler Voyager has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |