Volvo XC90 2002 vs Nissan Murano 2002
| 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 | 248 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 333 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 8.5 seconds | |
| Volvo XC90 engine produces 24 HP more power than Nissan Murano, whereas torque is 47 NM more than Nissan Murano. Despite the higher power, Volvo XC90 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 13.0 | 12.3 | |
|
The Nissan Murano is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volvo XC90 consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Murano, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC90 could require 105 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 82 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 530 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| Nissan Murano 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) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 25 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Infiniti FX, Nissan Pathfinder | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Murano 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 | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Volvo XC90 is larger. Volvo XC90 is 4 cm longer than the Nissan Murano, 2 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC90 is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 249 litres | 923 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2404 litres | 2005 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Volvo XC90 has 674 litres less trunk space than the Nissan Murano. 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 399 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.7 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`760 | 2`295 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC90 has
|
Nissan Murano has
| |