Toyota RAV4 2015 vs Volvo XC60 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 146 HP | 249 HP | |
| Torque: | 187 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 6.8 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Toyota RAV4 engine produces 103 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 163 NM less than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Toyota RAV4 reaches 100 km/h speed 4.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 9.3 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota RAV4 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Toyota RAV4 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota RAV4 could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Toyota RAV4 consumes 2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC60. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 820 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
|
Volvo XC60 2017: 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%). | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 390'000 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 Volvo XC60 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Camry | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo V60, Volvo S90 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.61 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 2.00 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.66 m | |
|
Toyota RAV4 is smaller, but slightly higher. Toyota RAV4 is 8 cm shorter than the Volvo XC60, 15 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota RAV4 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 505 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1432 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.4 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`050 | 2`470 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Toyota RAV4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo XC60 has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Toyota RAV4, so Toyota RAV4 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 16 600 | 29 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota RAV4 has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |