2005 MCC Crossblade vs. 2010 Volvo XC60
To start off, 2010 Volvo XC60 is newer by 5 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 MCC Crossblade. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 MCC Crossblade would be higher. At 2,000 cc (5 cylinders), 2010 Volvo XC60 is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Volvo XC60 weights approximately 1177 kg more than 2005 MCC Crossblade.
Because 2010 Volvo XC60 is all wheel drive (AWD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2005 MCC Crossblade. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2010 Volvo XC60 will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. 2010 Volvo XC60 has automatic transmission and 2005 MCC Crossblade has manual transmission. 2005 MCC Crossblade will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2010 Volvo XC60 will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2005 MCC Crossblade | 2010 Volvo XC60 | |
Make | MCC | Volvo |
Model | Crossblade | XC60 |
Year Released | 2005 | 2010 |
Engine Size | 599 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 3 cylinders | 5 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 70 HP | 0 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Rear | AWD |
Transmission Type | Manual | 6-speed shiftable automatic |
Vehicle Weight | 744 kg | 1921 kg |
Vehicle Length | 2630 mm | 4628 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1630 mm | 1890 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1520 mm | 1712 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 1810 mm | 2748 mm |