Toyota RAV4 2010 vs Volvo XC60 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 203 HP | |
| Torque: | 225 NM | 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.6 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is a more dynamic driving. Toyota RAV4 engine produces 33 HP less power than Volvo XC60, whereas torque is 75 NM less than Volvo XC60. Due to the lower power, Toyota RAV4 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 8.5 | |
|
The Volvo XC60 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Toyota RAV4 consumes 1.1 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 165 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 620 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| Volvo XC60 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
|
Toyota RAV4 has 4x4: It has proactive automatic all-wheel drive and acts as front-wheel drive under normal conditions. In the event of wheel slip, torque is transferred to the rear wheels via an electronically controlled multi-plate clutch. The clutch can also be locked manually using a button on the console. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 190 mm (7.5 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 19 years | 1 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Toyota Previa, Toyota Camry | 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. | |||
| Toyota RAV4 2010 2.4 engine: A fairly robust engine, easy to maintain and spare parts are readily available. Not too sensitive to fuel quality. High oil consumption and relatively short chain life (around 170 000 km). | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | no data | 1.71 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | 586 litres | 495 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1752 litres | 1455 litres | |
|
Toyota RAV4 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Toyota RAV4 has 91 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 Toyota RAV4 (by 297 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.9 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | above 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 (€): | 9400 | 9000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota RAV4 has
|
Volvo XC60 has
| |