Volvo XC60 2013 vs Honda CR-V 2012
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engines: | 2.0 - 3.0 | 1.6 - 2.4 | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 136 - 306 HP | 120 - 190 HP | |
Torque: | 320 - 440 NM | 190 - 350 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.9 - 11.2 seconds | 9.7 - 12.8 seconds | |
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.3 - 10.7 | 4.5 - 8.4 | |
Volvo XC60 petrol engines consumes on average 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than Honda CR-V. On average, Volvo XC60 equipped with diesel engines consume 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Honda CR-V. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.64 m | 4.56 m | |
Width: | 1.89 m | 1.82 m | |
Height: | 1.71 m | 1.68 m | |
Volvo XC60 is larger. Volvo XC60 is 8 cm longer than the Honda CR-V, 7 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC60 is 3 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 495 litres | 589 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1455 litres | 1669 litres | |
Honda CR-V has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volvo XC60 has 94 litres less trunk space than the Honda CR-V. This could mean that the Volvo XC60 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Honda CR-V (by 214 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 11.8 meters | |
The turning circle of the Volvo XC60 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Honda CR-V. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`401 | ~ 2`133 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | above average | above average | |
Average price (€): | 15 400 | 11 600 | |
Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 7.8/10 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC60 has
|
Honda CR-V has
| |