Volvo XC70 2004 vs Nissan X-Trail 2003
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Volvo XC70 is available only with four wheel (4x4) drive, while Nissan X-Trail can be equipped with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Nissan X-Trail also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 2.4 - 2.5 | 2.0 - 2.5 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 - 210 HP | 136 - 165 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 - 400 NM | 192 - 314 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.1 - 11.5 seconds | 9.9 - 13.1 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 - 11.1 | 7.1 - 10.0 | |
|
Volvo XC70 petrol engines consumes on average 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than Nissan X-Trail. On average, Volvo XC70 equipped with diesel engines consume 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.73 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.70 m | |
|
Volvo XC70 is larger, but lower. Volvo XC70 is 22 cm longer than the Nissan X-Trail, 10 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC70 is 14 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 485 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1641 litres | 1841 litres | |
| Volvo XC70 has 75 litres more trunk space than the Nissan X-Trail. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan X-Trail (by 200 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC70 is 1 metres more than that of the Nissan X-Trail, which means Volvo XC70 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 2`220 | ~ 2`009 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 3000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 7.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC70 has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |