Ford Mondeo 2013 vs Volvo XC60 2009
| Body: | Sedan | 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: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 149 HP | 203 HP | |
| Torque: | 230 NM | 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Mondeo engine produces 54 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 70 NM less than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Ford Mondeo reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 8.5 | |
| Ford Mondeo consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60, which means that by driving the Ford Mondeo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| Volvo XC60 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 128 mm (5 inches) | 230 mm (9.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volvo XC60 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Volvo XC60 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. Choose from eleven 4x4 versions of Volvo XC60 2009 if off-road driveability is important to you. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 350'000 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 Ford Mondeo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 1 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Kuga | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo V60 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.87 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.71 m | |
| Ford Mondeo is 24 cm longer than the Volvo XC60, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Mondeo is 23 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 429 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1455 litres | |
|
Volvo XC60 has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Ford Mondeo has 66 litres less trunk space than the Volvo XC60. This could mean that the Ford Mondeo uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Mondeo is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`500 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Volvo XC60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Mondeo has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than Volvo XC60, so Volvo XC60 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 10 600 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Mondeo has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |