Volvo XC60 2008 vs Citroen C-Crosser 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 156 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Citroen C-Crosser is a more dynamic driving. Volvo XC60 engine produces 7 HP more power than Citroen C-Crosser, but torque is 40 NM less than Citroen C-Crosser. Despite the higher power, Volvo XC60 reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C-Crosser is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC60 consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C-Crosser, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC60 could require 165 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC60 consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C-Crosser. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
|
Volvo XC60 has 4x4: The car is fitted with Haldex Generation IV proactive automatic all-wheel drive. Haldex processes data from the ABS control unit and the engine control unit and can increase the pressure on the multi-disc clutch for faster engagement when required. It has a 100% front to 0% rear torque split when not engaged with a maximum 50% to 50% torque split between axes. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 230 mm (9.1 inches) | 174 mm (6.9 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: | 4.63 m | 4.65 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.67 m | |
| Volvo XC60 is 2 cm shorter than the Citroen C-Crosser, 8 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC60 is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 495 litres | 184 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 184 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 495 litres | 441 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1455 litres | 1686 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Volvo XC60 has more luggage space (by 54 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen C-Crosser (by 231 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC60 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Citroen C-Crosser. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`505 | 2`410 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 9400 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC60 has
|
Citroen C-Crosser has
| |