Volvo XC90 2002 vs Mercedes ML 2001
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.9 Petrol | 3.2 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 | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 310 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 9 seconds | |
| Volvo XC90 engine produces 54 HP more power than Mercedes ML, whereas torque is 70 NM more than Mercedes ML. Despite the higher power, Volvo XC90 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.0 | 13.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 15.9 l/100km | 13.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mercedes ML is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Volvo XC90 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML, which means that by driving the Volvo XC90 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volvo XC90 consumes 2.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 83 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 530 km in combined cycle | 610 km in combined cycle | |
| 440 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Mercedes ML gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 480'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mercedes ML engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Chrysler Crossfire | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes ML might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.64 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.82 m | |
|
Volvo XC90 is larger, but lower. Volvo XC90 is 16 cm longer than the Mercedes ML, 6 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC90 is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 249 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2404 litres | no data | |
| 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 (kg): | 2`760 | 3`365 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | low | |
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 3000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 9.1/10 | 7.7/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC90 has
|
Mercedes ML has
| |