Volvo XC90 2002 vs Mercedes ML 2001
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Volvo XC90 is available with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive, while Mercedes ML can be equipped only with four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Volvo XC90 also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 2.4 - 4.4 | 2.7 - 5.4 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 - 315 HP | 163 - 347 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 - 440 NM | 310 - 560 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.3 - 12 seconds | 6.7 - 12.2 seconds | |
| In general, Mercedes ML are available with more powerful and dynamic engines than Volvo XC90. Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 - 14.0 | 9.4 - 14.8 | |
|
Volvo XC90 petrol engines consumes on average 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than Mercedes ML. On average, Volvo XC90 equipped with diesel engines consume 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.75 m | 1.82 m | |
|
Volvo XC90 is larger, but lower. Volvo XC90 is 16 cm longer than the Mercedes ML, 5 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC90 is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 530 litres | 1061 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2404 litres | 2020 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Volvo XC90 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 XC90 (by 384 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.7 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC90 is 0.8 metres more than that of the Mercedes ML, which means Volvo XC90 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | ~ 2`737 kg | ~ 2`870 kg | |
| Net weight: | ~ 2`089 kg | ~ 2`152 kg | |
| Load capacity: | ~ 648 kg | ~ 718 kg | |
| Volvo XC90 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 11 procentiem less than Mercedes ML. Therefore, Mercedes ML is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | low | |
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 3200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.1/10 | 7.7/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC90 has
|
Mercedes ML has
| |