Volvo XC60 2009 vs BMW X3 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 203 HP | 184 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 8.3 seconds | |
| Volvo XC60 engine produces 19 HP more power than BMW X3, whereas torque is 30 NM more than BMW X3. Despite the higher power, Volvo XC60 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 7.9 | |
| Volvo XC60 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC60 could require 15 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 870 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 230 mm (9.1 inches) | 212 mm (8.3 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 300'000 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: | 1 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo V60 | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X1 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The BMW X3 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.66 m | |
| Volvo XC60 is 2 cm shorter than the BMW X3, width is practically the same , while the height of Volvo XC60 is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 495 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1455 litres | 1600 litres | |
|
BMW X3 has more luggage space. Volvo XC60 has 55 litres less trunk space than the BMW X3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in BMW X3 (by 145 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.9 meters | |
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`500 | 2`285 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Volvo XC60 has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for BMW X3, so Volvo XC60 quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 9400 | 13 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC60 has
|
BMW X3 has
| |