Car comparison

Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6vsCadillac XT5 3.6

Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.

New comparison

Volvo XC60 II

2.0 T6

310 hp1969 ccGasolineAWDAutomaticTurbo + superchargedSUV2017-2018
VS

Cadillac XT5

3.6

314 hp3649 ccGasolineAWDAutomaticNaturally aspiratedSUV2016-2020

Comparison overview

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Best choices

Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    5.9 s
  • Fastest top speed
    240 km/h
    149 mph Unrestricted
    230 km/h
    143 mph Restricted
  • Highest torque
    400 Nm
    295 lb-ft
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    7.8 L/100 km
    30.2 mpg US
    36.2 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    9.5 L/100 km
    24.8 mpg US
    29.7 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    6.8 L/100 km
    34.6 mpg US
    41.5 mpg UK
  • Lowest CO2 emissions
    181 g/km
  • Best estimated range
    910 km
    566 mi
  • Best overall score
    69/100
  • Best performance score
    61/100
  • Best economy score
    86/100

Cadillac XT5 3.6

  • Most powerful
    314 hp
    234 kW
  • Lightest
    1,931 kg
    4,257 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    163 hp/t
    121 kW/t
    6.1 kg/hp
  • Largest trunk
    850 L
  • Best practicality score
    92/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelVolvoXC60 II2.0 T6CadillacXT53.6
Power
310hp231kW
314hp234kW
Torque
400Nm295lb-ft
368Nm271lb-ft
Curb weight
1,941kg4,279lb
1,931kg4,257lb
Gross weight
2,450kg5,401lb
2,550kg5,622lb
Top speed
Unrestricted
240 km/h149 mph
Restricted
230 km/h143 mph
Calculated
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph
Calculated
To 99% top speed
70.1s99% target: 238 km/h / 148 mph
Calculated
78.5s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
5.9s
7.5s
0-200 km/h
23.6s
Calculated
36.9s
Calculated
0-60 mph
5.6s
Calculated
7.1s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
7.8L/100 km30.2mpg US36.2mpg UK
10L/100 km23.5mpg US28.2mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
9.5L/100 km24.8mpg US29.7mpg UK
14.1L/100 km16.7mpg US20.0mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
6.8L/100 km34.6mpg US41.5mpg UK
7.6L/100 km30.9mpg US37.2mpg UK
Quarter mile
14.1s
Calculated
15.4s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
160hp/t119kW/t72hp/1000 lb
Calculated
163hp/t121kW/t74hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
206Nm/t138lb-ft/ton
Calculated
191Nm/t128lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
910km566mi
Calculated
830km516mi
Calculated
Displacement
1,969cc120cu in
3,649cc223cu in
Length
4,688mm185in
4,815mm190in
Width
1,902mm75in
1,903mm75in
Height
1,658mm65in
1,675mm66in
Wheelbase
2,865mm113in
2,857mm112in
Front track
1,668mm66in
1,638mm64in
Rear track
1,673mm66in
1,638mm64in
Ground clearance
216mm9in
200mm8in
Trunk volume
505L
850L
Max trunk volume
1,432L
1,784L
Doors
5
5
Seats
5
5
Fuel tank
71L
83L
CO2 emissions
181g/km
229g/km

Performance charts

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Dyno simulation

Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.

Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6Cadillac XT5 3.6PowerTorque
  • Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6: Power / Torque
  • Cadillac XT5 3.6: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T65,700 rpm2,200-5,100 rpm5,950 rpm
CadillacXT53.66,700 rpm5,000 rpm7,200 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricVolvoXC60 II2.0 T6CadillacXT53.6
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
5.6 s
7.1 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
5.9 s
7.5 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
23.6 s
36.9 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
240 km/h149 mph
Restricted
230 km/h143 mph
Likely limited
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph
Likely limited
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.3 s
2.5 s
330 ft
101 m
6.1 s
6.7 s
1/8 mile
201 m
9.2 s
10.1 s
1000 ft
305 m
11.8 s
13.0 s
1/4 mile
402 m
14.1 s
15.4 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
164 km/h
102 mph
149 km/h
93 mph

Power comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
310 hp
231 kW
CadillacXT53.6
314 hp
234 kW

Cadillac XT5 3.6 has 4 hp more than Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6.

The biggest power difference is between Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6 and Cadillac XT5 3.6: 4 hp (3 kW).

Torque comparison

Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
400 Nm
295 lb-ft
CadillacXT53.6
368 Nm
271 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
1,941 kg
4,279 lb
CadillacXT53.6
1,931 kg
4,257 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
Unrestricted
240 km/h149 mph
Restricted
230 km/h143 mph
CadillacXT53.6
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T65.9 s
CadillacXT53.67.5 s

Although Cadillac XT5 3.6 has more power, Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6 is quicker from 0-100 km/h.

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6 and Cadillac XT5 3.6: 1.6 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
7.8 L/100 km
30.2 mpg US
36.2 mpg UK
CadillacXT53.6
10.0 L/100 km
23.5 mpg US
28.2 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6 and Cadillac XT5 3.6: 2.2 L/100 km.

Power-to-weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
160 hp/t
119 kW/t
6.3 kg/hp
CadillacXT53.6
163 hp/t
121 kW/t
6.1 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
910 km
566 mi
CadillacXT53.6
830 km
516 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
310 hp
231 kW
5.9 s
Unrestricted
240 km/h149 mph
Restricted
230 km/h143 mph
CadillacXT53.6
314 hp
234 kW
7.5 s
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph

Most attractive quadrant

Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.

Chart data table
VehiclePerformance scorePracticality score
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
Power
310 hp
231 kW
0-100 km/h5.9 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
240 km/h149 mph
Restricted
230 km/h143 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
505 L
17.8 cu ft
Length
4,688 mm
184.6 in
Height
1,658 mm
65.3 in
CadillacXT53.6
Power
314 hp
234 kW
0-100 km/h7.5 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
850 L
30.0 cu ft
Length
4,815 mm
189.6 in
Height
1,675 mm
65.9 in

Performance vs fuel economy

Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.

Performance vs fuel economy data table
VehiclePerformance scoreFuel economy score
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
Power
310 hp
231 kW
0-100 km/h5.9 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
240 km/h149 mph
Restricted
230 km/h143 mph
7.8 L/100 km
30.2 mpg US
36.2 mpg UK
CadillacXT53.6
Power
314 hp
234 kW
0-100 km/h7.5 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph
10.0 L/100 km
23.5 mpg US
28.2 mpg UK

Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6 is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption

Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
7.8 L/100 km
30.2 mpg US
36.2 mpg UK
5.9 s
CadillacXT53.6
10.0 L/100 km
23.5 mpg US
28.2 mpg UK
7.5 s

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption

The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption data table
VehiclePower-to-weight, hp/tFuel consumption, L/100 km
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
160 hp/t
119 kW/t
6.3 kg/hp
7.8 L/100 km
30.2 mpg US
36.2 mpg UK
CadillacXT53.6
163 hp/t
121 kW/t
6.1 kg/hp
10.0 L/100 km
23.5 mpg US
28.2 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleVolvoXC60 II2.0 T6CadillacXT53.6
Power
310 hp
231 kW
314 hp
234 kW
Torque
400 Nm
295 lb-ft
368 Nm
271 lb-ft
Acceleration
5.9 s
7.5 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
240 km/h149 mph
Restricted
230 km/h143 mph
Unrestricted
220 km/h137 mph
Restricted
210 km/h130 mph
Lightness
1,941 kg
4,279 lb
1,931 kg
4,257 lb
Fuel consumption
7.8 L/100 km
30.2 mpg US
36.2 mpg UK
10.0 L/100 km
23.5 mpg US
28.2 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
505 L
17.8 cu ft
Length
4,688 mm
184.6 in
Height
1,658 mm
65.3 in
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
850 L
30.0 cu ft
Length
4,815 mm
189.6 in
Height
1,675 mm
65.9 in
Range score
910 km
566 mi
830 km
516 mi
CO2 score
181 g/km
229 g/km
Trunk score
505 L
17.8 cu ft
850 L
30.0 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
160 hp/t
119 kW/t
6.3 kg/hp
163 hp/t
121 kW/t
6.1 kg/hp
Overall
Fixed score
Fixed score

Fuel cost and annual usage

Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.

Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.

LC = Local Currency

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleVolvo XC60 II 2.0 T6Cadillac XT5 3.6
Consumption7.8 L/100 km30.2 mpg US36.2 mpg UK10 L/100 km23.5 mpg US28.2 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km13.65 LC100 km17.50 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi21.97 LC100 mi28.16 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,170 L309 US gal257 UK gal1,500 L396 US gal330 UK gal
Annual fuel cost2,048 LC/year2,625 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6

  • Has 32 Nm more
  • Is 1.6 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 20 km/h (12 mph) higher top speed
  • Uses 2.2 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 80 km (50 mi) more estimated range
  • Emits 48 g/km less CO2

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Highest top speed
  • Highest torque
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best estimated range

Cons

  • Lowest power
  • Heaviest
  • Smallest trunk

Cadillac XT5 3.6

  • Has 4 hp more
  • Is 10 kg lighter
  • Has 3 hp/t better power-to-weight
  • Has 345 L more trunk volume

Pros

  • Most powerful
  • Lightest
  • Best power-to-weight ratio
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Lowest top speed
  • Highest CO2 emissions

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6
Cadillac XT5 3.6
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

2.0 T6
2.0 T6
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6vsVolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
2.0 T6
2.0 T5
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6vsVolvoXC402.0 T5
3.6
2.0 T6
VS
CadillacXT53.6vsVolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
2.0 T6
2.0t
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6vsJaguarF-Pace2.0t
3.6
4.6 V8
VS
CadillacXT53.6vsToyotaLand Cruiser (J200)Facelift 20154.6 V8
2.0 T6
3.0 TDI
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6vsAUDIQ5 II (FY)3.0 TDI
3.6
3.0 V6 TSI
VS
CadillacXT53.6vsVolkswagenTouareg II (7P)Facelift 20143.0 V6 TSI
2.0 T6
4.4 V8
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6vsVolvoXC90Facelift 20074.4 V8
2.0 T6
40d
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6vsBMWX6 (F16)40d
3.6
2.0 P300
VS
CadillacXT53.6vsJaguarE-Pace2.0 P300
2.0 T6
2.0
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 T6vsAlfa RomeoStelvio (949)2.0
3.6
75D 75 kWh
VS
CadillacXT53.6vsTeslaModel X75D 75 kWh
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T6 vs Cadillac XT5 3.6 - car comparison - FastVsFaster