Volvo XC60 2013 vs Nissan X-Trail 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 181 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 420 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo XC60 engine produces 51 HP more power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 100 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. Thanks to more power Volvo XC60 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan X-Trail is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC60 consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC60 could require 195 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC60 consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1090 km in combined cycle | 1170 km in combined cycle | |
| 1320 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 950 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
|
Volvo XC60 has 4x4: This Volvo has Haldex Generation V proactive automatic four-wheel drive. It analyzes input from the ABS and engine control units and can increase pressure on the multi-disc clutch for faster application when needed. During normal driving, the torque split is 100% to the front and no torque to the rear. If wheel spin is detected, torque can be split evenly between the axles (50% to 50%). | |||
| Ground clearance: | 230 mm (9.1 inches) | 210 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. | |||
| Nissan X-Trail 2014 1.6 engine: This 1.6-liter diesel engine is a joint development by Renault-Nissan engineers. It features a cast-iron block, a 16-valve cylinder head with hydraulic lifters, a chain-driven timing system, and a Bosch Common ... More about Nissan X-Trail 2014 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.64 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.71 m | 1.71 m | |
|
Volvo XC60 is larger. Volvo XC60 and Nissan X-Trail are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 495 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1455 litres | 1877 litres | |
|
Nissan X-Trail has more luggage space. Volvo XC60 has 55 litres less trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 422 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.7 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC60 is 0.5 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means Volvo XC60 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`270 | 2`310 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Volvo XC60 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan X-Trail has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Volvo XC60, so Volvo XC60 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 13 800 | 9600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC60 has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |