2006 Chrysler Pacifica vs. 2009 Volvo XC90
To start off, 2009 Volvo XC90 is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2006 Chrysler Pacifica. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2006 Chrysler Pacifica would be higher. At 3,966 cc (6 cylinders), 2006 Chrysler Pacifica is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Chrysler Pacifica (250 HP @ 6400 RPM) has 18 more horse power than 2009 Volvo XC90. (232 HP @ 6200 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2006 Chrysler Pacifica should accelerate faster than 2009 Volvo XC90.
Because 2009 Volvo XC90 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2006 Chrysler Pacifica. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Volvo XC90 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. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Chrysler Pacifica (339 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 103 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Volvo XC90. (236 Nm @ 3200 RPM). This means 2006 Chrysler Pacifica will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Volvo XC90.
Compare all specifications:
| 2006 Chrysler Pacifica | 2009 Volvo XC90 | |
| Make | Chrysler | Volvo |
| Model | Pacifica | XC90 |
| Year Released | 2006 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Crossover | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 3966 cc | 3192 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 250 HP | 232 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6400 RPM | 6200 RPM |
| Torque | 339 Nm | 236 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Number of Seats | 6 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Length | 5060 mm | 4810 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2020 mm | 1900 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1700 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2960 mm | 2650 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 10.2 L/100km | 11.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 13.8 L/100km | 16.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 87 L | 70 L |
