2010 Volvo XC60 - Click above for high-res image gallery
Volvo's new XC60 sits at the top of the pack when it battles head-to-head against the Audi Q5, Mercedes-Benz GLK350, and Cadillac SRX, says Edmunds in its latest four-way comparison. The entrants, each new members of the expanding Compact Luxury Crossover segment, were all selected for the battle based on size and their less-than-$40,000 starting prices. Veterans such as the Acura RDX, BMW X3, and Infiniti EX35 were left home as they aren't rookies to the field.
With a resolutely last place finish, the Cadillac SRX was clobbered over its outward visibility, weight, lack of overall space (despite being the largest of the bunch), and cramped second-row seating. The fact that the Edmund's test car was a base FWD model didn't help either.
Tied for second place were the GLK350 and Q5, both praised for their power, ride, and handling. The Mercedes came up short in overall utility, while the Audi took some hits for its electric power steering.
According to the testers, the XC60 "won by a hair" thanks to its generous cargo capacity, second-row comfort, and "safety features galore." While the Swede offered plenty of power, it suffered from poor fuel economy and less-than-satisfying handling. So, how did a not-fun-to-drive Volvo CUV climb to the top of the comparison (one that Edmunds says, "none of our editors would personally choose")? You'll have to read their story to find out.
With a resolutely last place finish, the Cadillac SRX was clobbered over its outward visibility, weight, lack of overall space (despite being the largest of the bunch), and cramped second-row seating. The fact that the Edmund's test car was a base FWD model didn't help either.
Tied for second place were the GLK350 and Q5, both praised for their power, ride, and handling. The Mercedes came up short in overall utility, while the Audi took some hits for its electric power steering.
According to the testers, the XC60 "won by a hair" thanks to its generous cargo capacity, second-row comfort, and "safety features galore." While the Swede offered plenty of power, it suffered from poor fuel economy and less-than-satisfying handling. So, how did a not-fun-to-drive Volvo CUV climb to the top of the comparison (one that Edmunds says, "none of our editors would personally choose")? You'll have to read their story to find out.
No comments:
Post a Comment