Land Rover Discovery Sport · Facelift 2019
Car comparison
Land Rover Discovery Sport · Facelift 2019 2.0 P250vsVolvo XC60 II 2.0 T5
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolvo XC60 II
2.0 T5
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Land Rover Discovery Sport Facelift 2019 2.0 P250
- Fastest top speed225 km/h140 mph
- Most powerful250 hp186 kW
- Highest torque365 Nm269 lb-ft
- Lightest1,864 kg4,109 lb
- Best power-to-weight134 hp/t100 kW/t7.5 kg/hp
- Best estimated range838 km520 mi
- Largest trunk1,179 L
- Best overall score64/100
- Best practicality score92/100
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.9 s
- Lowest combined fuel consumption7.3 L/100 km32.2 mpg US38.7 mpg UK
- Best performance score53/100
- Best economy score87/100
Specification comparison
| Model | Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 250hp186kW | 250hp186kW |
| Torque | 365Nm269lb-ft | 350Nm258lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,864kg4,109lb | 1,927kg4,248lb |
| Gross weight | 2,550kg5,622lb | - |
| Top speed | 225 km/h 140 mph | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph Calculated |
| To 99% top speed | 93.1s99% target: 223 km/h / 138 mph Calculated | 76.1s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.8s | 6.9s |
| 0-200 km/h | 38.2s Calculated | 35.2s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.4s Calculated | 6.5s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 8L/100 km29.4mpg US35.3mpg UK | 7.3L/100 km32.2mpg US38.7mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | - | 9.1L/100 km25.8mpg US31.0mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | - | 6.2L/100 km37.9mpg US45.6mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.6s Calculated | 15.0s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 134hp/t100kW/t61hp/1000 lb Calculated | 130hp/t97kW/t59hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 196Nm/t131lb-ft/ton Calculated | 182Nm/t122lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 838km520mi Calculated | 822km511mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,997cc122cu in | 1,969cc120cu in |
| Length | 4,597mm181in | 4,688mm185in |
| Width | - | 1,902mm75in |
| Height | 1,727mm68in | 1,658mm65in |
| Wheelbase | 2,741mm108in | 2,865mm113in |
| Front track | 1,636mm64in | 1,668mm66in |
| Rear track | 1,643mm65in | 1,673mm66in |
| Ground clearance | 212mm8in | 216mm9in |
| Trunk volume | 1,179L | 505L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,794L | 1,432L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 67L | 60L |
| CO2 emissions | - | 169g/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.
- Land Rover Discovery Sport Facelift 2019 2.0 P250: Power / Torque
- Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 5,500 rpm | 1,400-4,500 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 5,500 rpm | 1,800-4,800 rpm | 6,000 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.4 s | 6.5 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.8 s | 6.9 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 38.2 s | 35.2 s |
| Top speed | 225 km/h 140 mph | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph Likely limited |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.5 s | 2.4 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.7 s | 6.4 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.2 s | 9.7 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.2 s | 12.6 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.6 s | 15.0 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 146 km/h 91 mph | 151 km/h 94 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 250 hp 186 kW |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 250 hp 186 kW |
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 365 Nm 269 lb-ft |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 1,864 kg 4,109 lb |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 1,927 kg 4,248 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 225 km/h 140 mph |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 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
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 7.8 s |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 6.9 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5 and Land Rover Discovery Sport Facelift 2019 2.0 P250: 0.9 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 8.0 L/100 km 29.4 mpg US 35.3 mpg UK |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 7.3 L/100 km 32.2 mpg US 38.7 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5 and Land Rover Discovery Sport Facelift 2019 2.0 P250: 0.7 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 134 hp/t 100 kW/t 7.5 kg/hp |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 130 hp/t 97 kW/t 7.7 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 838 km 520 mi |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 822 km 511 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 250 hp 186 kW | 7.8 s | 225 km/h 140 mph |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 250 hp 186 kW | 6.9 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.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 |
| 8.0 L/100 km 29.4 mpg US 35.3 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 |
| 7.3 L/100 km 32.2 mpg US 38.7 mpg UK | ||||||
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5 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.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 8.0 L/100 km 29.4 mpg US 35.3 mpg UK | 7.8 s |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 7.3 L/100 km 32.2 mpg US 38.7 mpg UK | 6.9 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | 134 hp/t 100 kW/t 7.5 kg/hp | 8.0 L/100 km 29.4 mpg US 35.3 mpg UK |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 130 hp/t 97 kW/t 7.7 kg/hp | 7.3 L/100 km 32.2 mpg US 38.7 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P250 | VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 250 hp 186 kW | 250 hp 186 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 365 Nm 269 lb-ft | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.8 s | 6.9 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 225 km/h 140 mph | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,864 kg 4,109 lb | 1,927 kg 4,248 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 8.0 L/100 km 29.4 mpg US 35.3 mpg UK | 7.3 L/100 km 32.2 mpg US 38.7 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 838 km 520 mi | 822 km 511 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | - | 169 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 1,179 L 41.6 cu ft | 505 L 17.8 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 134 hp/t 100 kW/t 7.5 kg/hp | 130 hp/t 97 kW/t 7.7 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
| Vehicle | Land Rover Discovery Sport Facelift 2019 2.0 P250 | Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 8 L/100 km29.4 mpg US35.3 mpg UK | 7.3 L/100 km32.2 mpg US38.7 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 14.00 LC100 km | 12.78 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 22.53 LC100 mi | 20.56 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,200 L317 US gal264 UK gal | 1,095 L289 US gal241 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,100 LC/year | 1,916 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Land Rover Discovery Sport Facelift 2019 2.0 P250
- Has 15 Nm more
- Is 63 kg lighter
- Has 5 km/h (3 mph) higher top speed
- Has 4 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 16 km (10 mi) more estimated range
- Has 674 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Highest combined fuel consumption
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5
- Is 0.9 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Uses 0.7 L/100 km less fuel
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
Cons
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























