Volvo XC90 2005 vs Mercedes ML 2001
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.4 Petrol | 4.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 315 HP | 250 HP | |
| Torque: | 440 NM | 560 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.3 seconds | 8.1 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC90 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo XC90 engine produces 65 HP more power than Mercedes ML, but torque is 120 NM less than Mercedes ML. Thanks to more power Volvo XC90 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 14.0 | 10.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 14.2 l/100km | 12.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mercedes ML is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC90 consumes 3.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volvo XC90 could require 465 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC90 consumes 2.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 83 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 570 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 810 km on highway | 940 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 690 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: | 700'000 km | 420'000 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 Volvo XC90 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Volvo S80 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mercedes E klase, Mercedes S klase, Mercedes G klase | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mercedes ML 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 | 4.64 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`500 | |
| 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
| |