In the battle of luxury SUVs, the Volvo XC90 stands out with its elegant Scandinavian design and commitment to safety, making it a favorite for families seeking both style and peace of mind. On the other hand, the VW Tayron impresses with its sporty performance and advanced technology features, appealing to those who prioritize a dynamic driving experience. Ultimately, the choice between these two vehicles boils down to personal preference, whether you lean towards Volvo's iconic sophistication or VW's agile innovation.
When it comes to the SUV segment, two strong contenders have emerged: the Volvo XC90 and the VW Tayron. These vehicles not only offer exceptional comfort and versatility but also incorporate advanced technology and innovative features. In this article, we will dive into the technical aspects and innovations of both models, helping potential buyers make an informed decision.
The Volvo XC90 provides a choice between a Petrol MHEV and a Plugin Hybrid engine, with power outputs ranging from 250 HP to an impressive 455 HP. This versatility allows for engaging performance with acceleration times of 7.7 seconds for the base model and a remarkable 5.4 seconds for the hybrid variant. The XC90 also offers a fuel consumption of 8.5 L/100km for the petrol variant and an eco-friendly 1.2 L/100km for the plugin hybrid version.
On the other hand, the VW Tayron stands out with a wider range of engine options including Petrol MHEV, Plugin Hybrid, and Diesel. Power output varies from 150 HP to 272 HP, with acceleration times as low as 7.3 seconds. The Tayron's efficiency is commendable, boasting fuel consumption figures of 6.2 L/100km for petrol and as low as 0.4 L/100km for its hybrid models, showcasing its focus on sustainability.
In terms of electric capabilities, the XC90 is equipped with a battery capacity of 14.7 kWh, offering an electric driving range of 71 km. This is suitable for daily commutes, combined with the assurance of a robust petrol engine for longer journeys.
The VW Tayron, however, edges ahead with a larger battery capacity of 19.7 kWh and an electric range of up to 126 km, making it more advantageous for those who want to rely on electric power for longer distances. This range elevates the Tayron's usability and efficiency, especially in urban settings where electric driving is preferred.
When it comes to size, the Volvo XC90 is slightly larger, measuring 4953 mm in length, 1923 mm in width, and 1771 mm in height. It also provides seating for seven passengers, making it more suitable for larger families or those needing additional passenger space.
The VW Tayron, while smaller at 4792 mm in length and 1853 to 1866 mm in width, caters to five passengers. The Tayron boasts a generous trunk capacity of 885 liters, significantly more than the XC90's 302 liters for non-hybrid variants, emphasizing the Tayron's practicality for storage.
The Volvo XC90 is recognized for its all-wheel-drive capabilities, ensuring a stable and confident driving experience in various conditions. The XC90 also integrates state-of-the-art safety features, advanced infotainment systems, and a comfortable and luxurious interior that enhances driver and passenger experiences.
In contrast, the VW Tayron employs a choice between front-wheel drive and all-wheel drive, catering to different driving preferences. Moreover, the Tayron features innovative technologies such as the Doppelkupplung (dual-clutch) transmission, ensuring quick gear shifts for a sportier driving feel. The tech integration is evident in its advanced connectivity options, making it apt for the tech-savvy driver.
Both the Volvo XC90 and the VW Tayron provide compelling attributes that cater to different needs. The XC90 is ideal for larger families requiring ample seating and a premium driving experience, while the Tayron appeals to those looking for more economical choices with advanced technology and higher electric range. Ultimately, your decision will boil down to your specific requirements in terms of space, driving experience, and energy efficiency.
As the SUV market evolves, both of these vehicles represent the innovation and thoughtfulness of their respective brands, ensuring that you will not be disappointed no matter which model you choose.
|
|
|
|
Costs and Consumption |
|
---|---|
Price
about 68500 - 81300
£
|
Price
about 39000 - 52600
£
|
Consumption L/100km
1.2 - 8.5
L
|
Consumption L/100km
0.4 - 7.8
L
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
Electric Range
71
km
|
Electric Range
117 - 126
km
|
Battery Capacity
14.7
kWh
|
Battery Capacity
19.7
kWh
|
co2
30 - 191
g/km
|
co2
9 - 177
g/km
|
Fuel tank capacity
71
L
|
Fuel tank capacity
45 - 58
L
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
Body Type
SUV
|
Body Type
SUV
|
Seats
7
|
Seats
5
|
Doors
5
|
Doors
5
|
Curb weight
2080 - 2297
kg
|
Curb weight
1682 - 1948
kg
|
Trunk capacity
262 - 302
L
|
Trunk capacity
705 - 885
L
|
Length
4953
mm
|
Length
4792
mm
|
Width
1923
mm
|
Width
1853 - 1866
mm
|
Height
1771
mm
|
Height
1666 - 1668
mm
|
Payload
653 - 710
kg
|
Payload
489 - 566
kg
|
Engine and Performance |
|
Engine Type
Petrol MHEV, Plugin Hybrid
|
Engine Type
Petrol MHEV, Plugin Hybrid, Diesel, Petrol
|
Transmission
Automatic
|
Transmission
Automatic
|
Transmission Detail
Automatic Gearbox
|
Transmission Detail
Dual-Clutch Automatic, Automat. Schaltgetriebe (Doppelkupplung)
|
Drive Type
All-Wheel Drive
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive
|
Power HP
250 - 455
HP
|
Power HP
150 - 272
HP
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
5.4 - 7.7
s
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
6.1 - 9.7
s
|
Max Speed
180
km/h
|
Max Speed
204 - 240
km/h
|
Torque
360 - 709
Nm
|
Torque
250 - 400
Nm
|
Number of Cylinders
4
|
Number of Cylinders
4
|
Power kW
184 - 335
kW
|
Power kW
110 - 200
kW
|
Engine capacity
1969
cm3
|
Engine capacity
1498 - 1984
cm3
|
Top speed
180
km/h
|
Top speed
204 - 240
km/h
|
General |
|
Model Year
2024
|
Model Year
2025
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
G, B
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
E, B, F, G
|
Brand
Volvo
|
Brand
VW
|
The prices and data displayed are estimates based on German list prices and may vary by country. This information is not legally binding.