2027 · EX60 P10 AWD electric
Side by side · 2027 and 2024
Volvo EX60vsVolvo XC40
330 mi EPA · 19 min 10–80%293 mi EPA · 26 min 10–80%
vs
The Volvo EX60 is rated 330 miles on the EPA test, the Volvo XC40 293. A 10–80% stop takes 19 minutes in the Volvo EX60 and 26 in the Volvo XC40. Every figure below names the version of the car it belongs to, and the three tools further down turn the same numbers into a charging race, a road trip and a yearly bill.
At a glance
Volvo EX60 · EX60 P10 AWD electric
330mi EPA
19min 10–80%
Volvo XC40 · XC40 Recharge
293mi EPA
26min 10–80%
The short answer
The Volvo EX60 is the quicker car to charge.
1
The Volvo EX60 is rated 330 miles against 293 — 37 miles, 13% further. It uses 30 kWh to cover 100 miles where the Volvo XC40 needs 31.7.
2
A 10–80% stop takes 19 minutes in the Volvo EX60 and 26 in the Volvo XC40. On a 50 kW post it is 76 and 56 minutes, so most of the advantage disappears at a slow site.
3
The Volvo EX60 makes 375 kW against 170.
Which one, in one line
Pick the Volvo EX60 ifit wins on range (330 mi against 293), running cost (30 kWh per 100 miles against 31.7), charging (19 minutes against 26).
The priceNeither car has a US list price in the sheet yet, so nothing here claims an MSRP or a monthly payment.
2024 · XC40 Recharge
Charging, raced
Two cars, one post, same clock
Charging speed is a station number and a car number, and the smaller one wins. Set the post and both cars fill against the same clock — the interesting part is not who wins, it is how much of the gap a slow post takes away.
Each car is modelled on its own published 10–80% time, which gives an average power over that window: 201 kW for the Volvo EX60, 108 kW for the Volvo XC40. A post above that average changes nothing; a post below it sets the pace.
Volvo XC40CCS126min
Volvo EX60CCS125min
At 150 kW, going from 10% to 80% takes 25 min in the Volvo EX60 and 26 min in the Volvo XC40 — a gap of 1 minutes. The station is capping the quicker car here, so the gap is narrower than the peak figures suggest — at a faster post it widens again.
Every figure
The numbers, with the version attached
A tick marks a figure that is simply more useful — more range, less energy per mile, a faster stop. Rows without a tick are different, not better: a bigger battery, a longer wheelbase and a wider body are all trades, and this page does not pretend otherwise.
| Measure | Volvo EX60 | Volvo XC40 |
|---|---|---|
| Range and efficiency | ||
| EPA range | 330 mi✓2027 EX60 P10 AWD electric | 293 mi2024 XC40 Recharge |
| EPA efficiency | 3.33 mi/kWh✓ | 3.16 mi/kWh |
| Energy per 100 miles | 30 kWh✓ | 31.7 kWh |
| Battery, usable | 91 kWhVolvo EX60 P10 AWD (MY27) | 67 kWhVolvo XC40 Recharge Pure Electric (MY23) |
| Range left in the cold | 57%modelled envelope | 57%modelled envelope |
| Charging | ||
| DC peak | 370 kW✓ | 136 kW |
| 10–80% at peak | 19 min✓ | 26 min |
| Average power, 10–80%(derived) | 201 kW✓ | 108 kW |
| AC maximum | 22 kW✓ | 11 kW |
| Full charge on 240 V | 9 h | 8 h✓ |
| Fast-charge plug | CCS1 | CCS1 |
| Size and weight | ||
| Length | 189.1 in | 174.2 in |
| Width with mirrors | 81.4 in | 80.1 in |
| Height | 64.4 in | 65 in |
| Wheelbase | 116.9 in | 106.4 in |
| Kerb weight | 5,181 lb | 4,460 lb |
| Space and practicality | ||
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Boot, seats up | 18.5 cu ft✓ | 14.8 cu ft |
| Front trunk | 1.8 cu ft✓ | 1.1 cu ft |
| Maximum cargo | 59.1 cu ft✓ | 45.7 cu ft |
| Towing, braked | 5,291 lb✓ | 3,307 lb |
| Heat pump | Standard Equipment | Standard Equipment |
| Performance and safety | ||
| Power | 375 kW✓ | 170 kW |
| 0–100 km/h | 4.6 s✓ | 7.4 s |
| Euro NCAP stars | — | 5 |
| Battery warranty | 8 years / 99,419 mi8 years / 160,000 km | 8 years / 99,419 mi8 years / 160,000 km |
| V2L / V2H | Ready | Not supported |
How to read the mixed rows. Range and efficiency come from one EPA row — the longest-range version of each car's current model year, not the longest range it has ever been rated at. Battery, charging and the catalogue dimensions come from the catalogue's headline record, which is not always the same trim. Each of those rows names its trim where the two disagree, and the model pages carry the full per-trim table.
What the cold row is not. “Range left in the cold” is the catalogue's modelled cold-highway figure as a share of its mild-urban one — a European model, not an EPA test in US weather. It is shown as a share rather than in miles so it cannot be mistaken for a US range rating.
Euro NCAP is the European crash programme; NHTSA and IIHS ratings are not in this dataset and are not claimed here. Warranty terms are the catalogue's kilometre figures converted to miles, so read them as indicative until a US warranty source replaces them.
Your numbers
What this pair costs you, on your drive
Two questions decide most purchases: how often you stop, and what the year costs. Both are arithmetic on the figures above, so change the inputs and the answer changes with you.
The drive
Starts full, arrives at 10%, charges back to 80% at each stop, and assumes a highway range of 85% of the EPA figure.
- Volvo EX60
- 2
- Volvo XC40
- 3
stops · 38 min charging
stops · 78 min charging
The year
Energy at the wheels from the EPA label, priced at the tariff you pay. Home charging is usually cheaper than the directory's median.
- Volvo EX60
- $1,260
- Volvo XC40
- $1,331
$11 per 100 mi
$11 per 100 mi
The trip model ignores charger detours, queueing and the last 10% of the pack, which is slow on both cars. The yearly cost is energy only: no session fees, no idle fees, no home-charger installation, and no petrol car to compare against.
Your priorities
A verdict you can argue with
There is no single winner, only a winner for a set of priorities. Move the sliders and the weighting changes — nothing here is a magazine score, and the page never hides the numbers it is built from.
Weighted result
Volvo EX60
wins 6 of 6 measures on these weights
Volvo EX60100%
Volvo XC400%
Each measure is scaled between the two cars, so a weight of 5 means “this is the thing I care about” and 0 means “I do not care at all”. The scores are relative, not a rating out of ten.
Questions
Short answers, then the reasoning
Every figure here comes from the same data as the rest of the page. Where the data cannot answer, the page says so instead of guessing.
Still unsure about a term? The charging glossary covers the rest of them.
Which has more range, the Volvo EX60 or the Volvo XC40?
The Volvo EX60. The Volvo EX60 is rated 330 miles and the Volvo XC40 293, each on the longest-range version of its current model year — 2027 EX60 P10 AWD electric and 2024 XC40 Recharge respectively. EPA figures are lab scores from one standard test, not a promise for a cold morning or a steady 75 mph.
Which charges faster?
The Volvo EX60. Going from 10% to 80% takes 19 minutes in the Volvo EX60 (370 kW peak) and 26 in the Volvo XC40 (136 kW peak). At a slow post the station becomes the limit and the gap narrows, because the slower car is short of power rather than short of time.
Do they use the same plug?
Yes. Both list CCS1 for DC fast charging, so either car can use the same sites without an adapter. An adapter still cannot raise the power a car will accept.
Which is cheaper to run?
The Volvo EX60, by about $203.24 a year at 12,000 miles and $0.35 per kWh. It uses 30 kWh per 100 miles against 31.7. That is energy only, at the wheels: session fees, idle fees and home-charger installation are not in it.
Which has more space?
The Volvo EX60: 18.5 cu ft of boot against 14.8 cu ft. Boot volumes are measured by different conventions between makers, so read the direction as reliable and the exact size of the gap as indicative.
Is there a price comparison?
Not yet — neither car has a US list price in the current dataset. When a price source covers both, price becomes one more row in the table and one more slider in the weighting tool.
Other comparisons
All comparisonsEvery figure on this page comes from the same records the Volvo EX60 and Volvo XC40 pages use. How the sources are chosen, and what a figure here never claims, is on the methodology page.