Volvo XC60 2008 vs Mazda CX-7 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 2.3 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Volvo XC60) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Mazda CX-7) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 260 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 7.9 seconds | |
|
Mazda CX-7 is a more dynamic driving. Volvo XC60 engine produces 97 HP less power than Mazda CX-7, whereas torque is 40 NM less than Mazda CX-7. Due to the lower power, Volvo XC60 reaches 100 km/h speed 3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.3 | 11.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 11.8 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC60 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC60 consumes 2.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-7, which means that by driving the Volvo XC60 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 405 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC60 consumes 3.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda CX-7. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 69 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 580 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo XC60 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.68 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.87 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.64 m | |
| Volvo XC60 is 5 cm shorter than the Mazda CX-7, 2 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC60 is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 495 litres | 455 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1455 litres | 774 litres | |
|
Volvo XC60 has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Mazda CX-7 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 Volvo XC60 (by 681 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC60 is 0.5 metres more than that of the Mazda CX-7, which means Volvo XC60 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`505 kg | 2`301 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`816 kg | 1`740 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 689 kg | 561 kg | |
| Volvo XC60 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 19 procentiem more than Mazda CX-7. Therefore, Volvo XC60 is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 7800 | 2600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.1/10 | 8.5/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC60 has
|
Mazda CX-7 has
| |