Subaru Forester 2016 vs Volvo XC60 2013
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Subaru Forester is available only with four wheel (4x4) drive, while Volvo XC60 can be equipped with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Volvo XC60 also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 2.0 - 2.5 | 2.0 - 3.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 147 - 241 HP | 136 - 306 HP | |
| Torque: | 198 - 350 NM | 320 - 440 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.5 - 11.8 seconds | 6.9 - 11.2 seconds | |
| In general, Volvo XC60 are available with more powerful and dynamic engines than Subaru Forester. Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 - 8.5 | 5.3 - 10.7 | |
|
Subaru Forester petrol engines consumes on average 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than Volvo XC60. On average, Subaru Forester equipped with diesel engines consume 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. 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. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 220 mm (8.7 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.61 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Subaru Forester is smaller, but slightly higher. Subaru Forester is 4 cm shorter than the Volvo XC60, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Subaru Forester is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 505 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1564 litres | 1455 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Subaru Forester is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Gross weight: | ~ 2`056 kg | ~ 2`401 kg | |
| Net weight: | ~ 1`591 kg | ~ 1`827 kg | |
| Load capacity: | ~ 465 kg | ~ 574 kg | |
| Subaru Forester load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 23 procentiem less than Volvo XC60. Therefore, Volvo XC60 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 11 200 | 13 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Subaru Forester has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |