Volvo XC90 2002 vs Infiniti FX 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.9 Petrol | 3.5 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: | 272 HP | 280 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 366 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 7.1 seconds | |
|
Infiniti FX is a more dynamic driving. Volvo XC90 engine produces 8 HP less power than Infiniti FX, but torque is 14 NM more than Infiniti FX. Due to the lower power, Volvo XC90 reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.0 | 12.1 | |
| Volvo XC90 consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Infiniti FX, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC90 could require 135 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 90 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 530 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| Infiniti FX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 25 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Nissan Pathfinder, Nissan Murano | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Infiniti FX might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volvo XC90 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.93 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.65 m | |
|
Volvo XC90 is smaller, but higher. Volvo XC90 and Infiniti FX are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 249 litres | 776 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2404 litres | 1826 litres | |
| Volvo XC90 has 527 litres less trunk space than the Infiniti FX. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC90 (by 578 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.7 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC90 is 0.9 metres more than that of the Infiniti FX, which means Volvo XC90 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`760 | 2`340 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 3800 | 4600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.1/10 | 9.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC90 has
|
Infiniti FX has
| |