Compare Volvo V90 facelift vs Volvo V70 III facelift vs Toyota Auris 2 Touring Sports facelift
Variants
B4
B6 AWD
D3 MT
D3
D3 AWD
D4 MT
D4
D4 AWD
D5 AWD
T5
T6 AWD
T8 AWD
D2
D2 AT
D3
D3 AT
D4 163PS
D4 163PS AT
D4 163PS AT
D4 163PS AWD AT
D4 181PS
D4 181PS AT
D4 181PS AWD AT
D5
D5 AT
D5 AWD AT
T4 180PS
T4 180PS AT
T4F
T4F AT
T5 245PS AT
T6 AWD AT
1.2T CVT
1.2T MT
1.33 Dual VVT-i MT
1.4 D-4D MT
1.6 D-4D MT
1.8 Hybrid
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
560 L / 19.8 cu-ft ~ 1526 L / 53.9 cu-ft
555 L / 19.6 cu-ft ~ 1580 L / 55.8 cu-ft
530 L / 18.7 cu-ft
Fuel Capacity
70.0 L / 18.5 gal
Passengers
5
5
5
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Disc, 322-345 mm
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Disc, 320 mm
Disc
Disc
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
Double-wishbone
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Multi-link
Multi-link
Double-wishbone
Tire Size
205/55 R16
Turning Circle
11.8 m / 38.7 ft
11.7 m / 38.4 ft
11.0 m / 36.1 ft
Water Fording
250 mm / 9.8 in
Construction
Battery | Capacity
11.6 kWh (gross)
Body Style
5-door Station Wagon
Dimensions
Ground Clearance
156 mm / 6.1 in
151 mm / 5.9 in
Size | Height
1478 mm / 58.2 in
1547 mm / 60.9 in
1485 mm / 58.5 in
Size | Length
4945 mm / 194.7 in
4814 mm / 189.5 in
4595 mm / 180.9 in
Size | Width
1879 mm / 74.0 in | 2019 mm / 79.5 in (mirror unfolded) | 1895 mm / 74.6 in (mirror folded)
1907 mm / 75.1 in
1760 mm / 69.3 in
Track Width | Front
1617.0 mm / 63.7 in
1588.0 mm / 62.5 in
Track Width | Rear
1618.0 mm / 63.7 in
1586.0 mm / 62.4 in
Wheel Size
17 in, 18 in, 19 in, 20 in, 21 in
6.5J x 16
Wheelbase
2941 mm / 115.8 in
2816 mm / 110.9 in
2600 mm / 102.4 in
Performance
Braking | 100 km/h - 0
35.0 m / 114.8 ft
Coefficient Of Drag
0.30 ~ 0.33
Electric Range
53.0 km / 32.9 mi
Top Speed
180.0 km/h / 111.8 mph
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 6 W
Engine | Bore
82.0 mm / 3.2 in
Engine | Displacement
2.0 L / 120.2 cu-in / 1969.0 cc
Engine | Stroke
93.2 mm / 3.7 in
Transmission | Gears
6-speed
Production
Availability
2020
2015 ~ 2018
Reviews
Neofiliac score
69%
60%
30%
Pros
- Great styling
- Low fuel consumption
- Good towing capacity
- Decent handling
- Good engine lineup remained available
- Cleaner, more imposing design
- Very low fuel consumption
- Superb reliability
- More modern design
Cons
- Limited to low speed
- Only available with small engines
- Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
- Horrible 0-100kph time
- Can't even reach 200km/h
- Miserably low engine output
- Only available with small engines
- Poor handling
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.