2005 Mercury Sable 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 Mercury Sable. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Mercury Sable would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 2010 Volvo XC60 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2010 Volvo XC60 (281 HP) has 128 more horse power than 2005 Mercury Sable. (153 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2010 Volvo XC60 should accelerate faster than 2005 Mercury Sable. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2010 Volvo XC60 weights approximately 380 kg more than 2005 Mercury Sable. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Let's talk about torque, 2010 Volvo XC60 (400 Nm) has 148 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Mercury Sable. (252 Nm). This means 2010 Volvo XC60 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Mercury Sable.
Compare all specifications:
| 2005 Mercury Sable | 2010 Volvo XC60 | |
| Make | Mercury | Volvo |
| Model | Sable | XC60 |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Sedan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2983 cc | 3000 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 153 HP | 281 HP |
| Torque | 252 Nm | 400 Nm |
| Number of Seats | 6 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1513 kg | 1893 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5080 mm | 4628 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1860 mm | 1890 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1712 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2760 mm | 2774 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 8.7 L/100km | 11.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 11.8 L/100km | 14.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 70 L |
