Toyota C-HR vs Volvo XC90

Price and cost per week

Safety Rundown

ANCAP's published record does not give the Volvo XC90 a rating. With no pair of ratings to compare, the active-safety features in the spec table above are the fairer comparison.

Recalls on our record

A recall covers the builds its notice lists, not every car of a model. Check your VIN at vehiclerecalls.gov.au.

Feature Showdown

The Toyota C-HR features a 12.3-inch touchscreen paired with a 7-inch digital dash, while the Volvo XC90 gets a 11.2-inch display and 12.3-inch instruments. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.

The Volvo XC90 counters with head-up display, wireless charging, panoramic roof, heated front seats, power tailgate and Bowers & Wilkins audio. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Interior trim differs: the Toyota C-HR gets cloth upholstery while the Volvo XC90 offers leather. Climate control is 2-zone in the Toyota C-HR and 4-zone in the Volvo XC90.

Drivetrain

The Toyota C-HR uses a Petrol producing 103kW and 142Nm of torque, sent through a automatic to a FWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 10.2 seconds.

The Volvo XC90 responds with a 2.0L 4-cyl turbocharged 48V mild hybrid B5 making 183kW and 350Nm, paired to a automatic driving all four wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 7.7 seconds.

The Volvo XC90 has the clear power advantage at 183kW vs 103kW. In the 0-100 sprint (manufacturer-claimed), the Volvo XC90 is 2.5s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The Toyota C-HR measures 4,362mm long on a 2,640mm wheelbase, 591mm shorter than the Volvo XC90 at 4,953mm (2,984mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Volvo XC90 generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 388L in the Toyota C-HR and 301L in the Volvo XC90, giving the Toyota C-HR a 87L advantage. The Volvo XC90 seats 7 vs 5.

For towing, the Volvo XC90 leads with a 2,400kg braked capacity vs 725kg. That 1,675kg difference matters if you regularly hitch up.

Neither U-turns in one sweep on a 7 m local street (both need a three-point turn); the Toyota C-HR's turning circle is 1.6 m tighter, 10.4 m against 12.0 m kerb to kerb. The street estimate is indicative, worked from the published turning circles.

Cost to own

At 15,000 km a year, fuel for the Toyota C-HR costs about $1,140 a year (4 L/100km) and fuel for the Volvo XC90 about $2,309 a year (8.1 L/100km), at $1.90 a litre and 32c a kWh. That is $1,169 a year less for the Toyota C-HR.

Warranty: 5 years / Unlimited (Toyota C-HR) and 5 years / Unlimited (Volvo XC90). Capped-price servicing: no data (Toyota C-HR), 5 years (Volvo XC90).

Where each one leads

The Toyota C-HR: the lower starting price ($46,940 against $97,990), the bigger boot with the seats up (388L against 301L) and lower fuel or energy costs on our assumptions ($1,140 a year against $2,309).

The Volvo XC90: more power (183kW against 103kW) and the higher braked towing limit (2,400kg against 725kg).

The Verdict

Toyota C-HR scores higher, 80 vs 67

The Toyota C-HR scores 80 to the Volvo XC90's 67 on the CarSorted Score, and leads 3 of the 6 spec rows that separate them, at the lower price. The biggest gaps: fuel economy (Toyota C-HR ahead by 37 points), safety (Toyota C-HR ahead by 29 points), performance (Volvo XC90 ahead by 27 points). At 15,000 km a year, fuel for the Toyota C-HR costs about $1,169 less (4 L/100km against 8.1 L/100km, at $1.90 a litre). Boot space with the seats up: 388L in the Toyota C-HR, 301L in the Volvo XC90.

Common questions