Volvo XC70 2004 vs Nissan X-Trail 2003
| 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 | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| 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: | 210 HP | 165 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 230 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.1 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC70 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo XC70 engine produces 45 HP more power than Nissan X-Trail, whereas torque is 90 NM more than Nissan X-Trail. Thanks to more power Volvo XC70 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.2 | 9.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.8 l/100km | 11.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification Volvo XC70 consumes 0.8 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 XC70 could require 120 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volvo XC70 consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan X-Trail. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 630 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 780 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 540 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo XC70 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 25 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC90 | Used also on Nissan Sentra | |
| 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 | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.68 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 12 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`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Average price (€): | 3800 | 2600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 7.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC70 has
|
Nissan X-Trail has
| |