Honda CR-V 2015 vs Volvo XC60 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 160 HP | 163 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
| Honda CR-V engine produces 3 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 50 NM less than Volvo XC60. Despite less power, Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.7 | 5.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Honda CR-V is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60, which means that by driving the Honda CR-V over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda CR-V consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1230 km in combined cycle | 1320 km in combined cycle | |
| 1230 km on highway | 1420 km on highway | ||
| 870 km with real consumption | 920 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo XC60 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Honda CR-V 2015: Vehicle features automatic four-wheel drive system that sends torque to front wheels under typical conditions. Electronically controlled multi-plate clutch transfers torque to rear wheels when slipping is detected. The all-wheel drive system constantly communicates with the VSA dynamic stabilization system and the electric power steering to maintain full control of the vehicle, good traction and maneuverability in any road conditions. Volvo XC60 2013: This Volvo has Haldex Generation V proactive automatic four-wheel drive. It analyzes input from the ABS and engine control units and can increase pressure on the multi-disc clutch for faster application when needed. During normal driving, the torque split is 100% to the front and no torque to the rear. If wheel spin is detected, torque can be split evenly between the axles (50% to 50%). | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.61 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 2.10 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.69 m | 1.71 m | |
| Honda CR-V is 4 cm shorter than the Volvo XC60, 21 cm wider, while the height of Honda CR-V is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 589 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1669 litres | 1455 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Honda CR-V has 94 litres more trunk space than the Volvo XC60. The Volvo XC60 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 Honda CR-V (by 214 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo XC60 has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 14 400 | 15 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |