Nissan Murano vs Volvo V60: Specs Compared

Running cost over five years: at the EPA's 15,000-mile-a-year assumption the Nissan Murano burns about $2,100 of fuel annually against $2,100 for the Volvo V60. That $0 yearly gap compounds to roughly $0 over five years and $0 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 V60 leads in both cycles — 30 mpg city and 37 mpg highway against 27 and 30 mpg — so its fuel-efficiency advantage holds whether you commute in traffic or cover long highway miles.

Powertrain choice: the Nissan Murano is recorded with 3 distinct engine configurations (SIDI & PFI, 3.5, 2.5), the Volvo V60 with 4 (SIDI; Mild Hybrid, SIDI; PHEV, 2.0). Across 25 recorded Nissan Murano configurations and 40 for the Volvo V60, 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 Nissan Murano is offered with All-Wheel Drive, Front-Wheel Drive, the Volvo V60 with All-Wheel Drive, Front-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 Midsize Station Wagons and Small Station Wagons 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 V60 emits 99 g/mile of CO2 versus 310 g/mile for the Nissan Murano. Emissions track fuel consumption almost exactly, so the cleaner vehicle here is also the cheaper one to fuel.