Volvo XC60 2013 vs Nissan X-Trail 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 215 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 440 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.3 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC60 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo XC60 engine produces 85 HP more power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 120 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. Thanks to more power Volvo XC60 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 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 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 | ||
| 850 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 460'000 km | 350'000 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: | 6 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo XC70 | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, Renault Megane | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan X-Trail might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| 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, if possible |
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: | 2`270 kg | 2`310 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`834 kg | 1`590 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 436 kg | 720 kg | |
| Volvo XC60 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 65 procentiem less than Nissan X-Trail. Therefore, Nissan X-Trail is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| 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 (€): | 12 600 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC60 has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |