# In Contrast: 2007 Audi Q7 vs. 2007 Volvo XC90



## [email protected] (Apr 9, 2004)

Back in 2003 when the Volvo XC90 hit the American market, it was described as late to the SUV party by the automotive press. However, the party kept raging and the Swedish SUV has since become not only one of Volvo’s best selling offerings, but has also nabbed the bragging right of best-selling European SUV in North America – no doubt helped by its 3-row seat versatility that only minivan owners can claim superiority to. That same versatility and sales success must have weighed on Audi as they developed their later-to-the-party Q7 for public sale. With the Q7 now putting a few months of sales under its belt and a refreshening of the Volvo recently available on the market, it seemed natural to put the two stylish family trucksters up for a quick comparison.
* Full Story *


----------



## ProjectA3 (Aug 12, 2005)

*Re: In Contrast: 2007 Audi Q7 vs. 2007 Volvo XC90 ([email protected])*

great simple article George. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
another bonus for the Audi is that it is selling very well while Volvo's numbers are very low as of late.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

*Re: In Contrast: 2007 Audi Q7 vs. 2007 Volvo XC90 ([email protected])*

I'll second those comments on Q7 sales. The December 06 numbers for Audi are out this morning and Audi did very well indeed with the Q7.
Up here in the eastern suburbs of Cleveland, Qs are starting to show up all over the place. It really is an imposing, yet elegant creature.


----------



## phaetonmeister (Jan 16, 2005)

*Re: In Contrast: 2007 Audi Q7 vs. 2007 Volvo XC90 ([email protected])*

I was a proud member of the Q7 Launch Training Team, and we had the XC90 as a comparison vehicle, and there was NO comparison between the two vehicles.........the Q7 is an outstanding first example SUV from Audi! I can't wait to drive the R8 the new TT and the A5!


----------



## mkaresh (Oct 26, 2005)

*Re: In Contrast: 2007 Audi Q7 vs. 2007 Volvo XC90 ([email protected])*

Excellent comparison of the styling, interiors, and features. But then I got to the end and discovered that there were no driving impressions!
I recently drove the XC90 in both 3.2 and V8 Sport forms. The 3.2 is a slug. I cannot believe that Ford/Volvo went through the trouble of developing a new inline six, and didn't make it large and powerful enough to be competitive.
The V8 is better, but cannot compare to that in the Q7, as it's down nearly 40 horsepower. The Volvo weighs less, but still.
Inside, you sit higher within a narrower cabin. Like the BMW X5, the Volvo was developed when everyone assumed that people wanted a truck when they bought an SUV. It feels a bit tight to me. The Q7 driving position is much more car-like.
I've had more seat time in the Volvos than in the Audi. The Volvo can be fun because it feels relatively small and agile, but it also rolls more in turns (even the Sport) and feels a bit squishy (also even the sport). 
The Audi is quite a bit larger in terms of external dimensions (it's a much less space-efficient design), and you feel some of this extra bulk on the road. Still feels sportier and handles better.
Full review I wrote recently on the Volvos:
2007 Volvo XC90 review


_Modified by mkaresh at 9:27 PM 1-27-2007_


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 9, 2004)

*Re: In Contrast: 2007 Audi Q7 vs. 2007 Volvo XC90 (mkaresh)*

Thanks for posting. I think I've heard that Volvo plans a turbocharged version of this engine too. Where that fits in the XC90 offerings I don't know. Still, I think that was their reason for doing, relegating the 5cyl to the smaller cars as more of a perception thing. I agree with you. I actually prefer the 5cyl in the Volvo over the 6cyl.


----------



## mkaresh (Oct 26, 2005)

*Re: In Contrast: 2007 Audi Q7 vs. 2007 Volvo XC90 ([email protected])*

You're very welcome. Great forum.
I've spent some time over at SwedeSpeed as well, so I've also heard about the future turbo 3.2. Seems they could go a few different ways: do an LPT to keep the turbo 3.2 beneath the V8, or go HPT to replace the V8 entirely or just in the new Sport trim. 
Ford cancelled plans to put the Yamaha V8 in the MKS because the actual cost came in far higher than projected. So I wouldn't be surprised if they introduced the turbo 3.2 in either form and then killed the V8 when its sales dwindled from nearly nothing to nothing. The V8 has more people who'd like to see it dead than it has fans. To give it a shot, it needs to at least go the DI route like Audi has.


----------

