Volvo XC70 2004 vs Toyota RAV4 2006
| 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: | Automatic | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 2.2 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: | 163 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 310 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.5 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
| Volvo XC70 engine produces 27 HP more power than Toyota RAV4, whereas torque is 30 NM more than Toyota RAV4. Despite the higher power, Volvo XC70 reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.5 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota RAV4 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC70 consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC70 could require 285 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC70 consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota RAV4. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 1070 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 780 km with real consumption | ||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC90, Volvo C30 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Toyota Avensis, Toyota Corolla Verso, Toyota Verso | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.73 m | 4.40 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.68 m | |
|
Volvo XC70 is larger, but lower. Volvo XC70 is 33 cm longer than the Toyota RAV4, 4 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC70 is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 485 litres | 586 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1641 litres | 1470 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Volvo XC70 has 101 litres less trunk space than the Toyota RAV4. This could mean that the Volvo XC70 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC70 (by 171 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC70 is 1.4 metres more than that of the Toyota RAV4, which means Volvo XC70 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`190 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Toyota RAV4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo XC70 has serious deffects in 115 percent more cases than Toyota RAV4, so Toyota RAV4 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 5200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 7.7/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC70 has
|
Toyota RAV4 has
| |