Honda CR-V 2010 vs Volvo XC60 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.4 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 175 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 420 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Honda CR-V engine produces 25 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 70 NM less than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Honda CR-V reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC60 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda CR-V consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Honda CR-V could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda CR-V consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 780 km in combined cycle | 1010 km in combined cycle | |
| 930 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 1010 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 2010: Car features Honda`s real-time four-wheel-drive system, which sends torque to the front wheels under normal conditions. A multi-plate clutch transfers torque to the rear axle when wheel slip is identified (pressure is provided to the clutch by a dual-pump system). To allow ABS to work seamlessly, the clutch is also disengaged during braking. Volvo XC60 2008: The car is fitted with Haldex Generation IV proactive automatic all-wheel drive. Haldex processes data from the ABS control unit and the engine control unit and can increase the pressure on the multi-disc clutch for faster engagement when required. It has a 100% front to 0% rear torque split when not engaged with a maximum 50% to 50% torque split between axes. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.53 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.68 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Honda CR-V is smaller. Honda CR-V is 11 cm shorter than the Volvo XC60, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Honda CR-V is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 524 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1455 litres | |
|
Honda CR-V has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Honda CR-V has 29 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. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Honda CR-V is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`160 | 2`505 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | above average | |
| Honda CR-V has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo XC60 has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Honda CR-V, so Honda CR-V quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 9000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda CR-V has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |