Maserati Quattroporte vs Volvo S90: Specs Compared

Running cost over five years: at the EPA's 15,000-mile-a-year assumption the Volvo S90 burns about $2,550 of fuel annually against $3,800 for the Maserati Quattroporte. That $1,250 yearly gap compounds to roughly $6,250 over five years and $10,000 over eight — often more than the price difference between two trims of the same vehicle, and the single largest running-cost line item separating these two.

City and highway economy: the Volvo S90 leads in both cycles — 28 mpg city and 35 mpg highway against 17 and 25 mpg — so its fuel-efficiency advantage holds whether you commute in traffic or cover long highway miles.

Powertrain choice: the Maserati Quattroporte is recorded with 1 distinct engine configuration (SIDI), the Volvo S90 with 4 (SIDI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI; PHEV, 2.0). Across 32 recorded Maserati Quattroporte configurations and 23 for the Volvo S90, the wider the engine spread the more the real-world fuel efficiency depends on which version you actually buy, so check the specific model year and drivetrain rather than the headline number.

Drivetrain and class: the Maserati Quattroporte is offered with Rear-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive, the Volvo S90 with Front-Wheel Drive, All-Wheel Drive. All-wheel drive typically costs one to two mpg combined against the same vehicle in front- or rear-wheel drive, which is worth remembering when the gap between these two is small. The EPA classes them as Large Cars and Midsize Cars respectively — the class drives the interior volume, cargo space and passenger space each one is measured against.

Tailpipe emissions: at their cleanest configurations the Volvo S90 emits 110 g/mile of CO2 versus 453 g/mile for the Maserati Quattroporte. Emissions track fuel consumption almost exactly, so the cleaner vehicle here is also the cheaper one to fuel.