Land Rover Discovery Sport · Facelift 2019
Car comparison
Land Rover Discovery Sport · Facelift 2019 2.0 P290vsVolvo XC90 II 2.0 T6
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolvo XC90 II
2.0 T6
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 P290
- Fastest top speed233 km/h145 mph
- Highest torque400 Nm295 lb-ft
- Lightest1,882 kg4,149 lb
- Best power-to-weight154 hp/t115 kW/t6.5 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption7.6 L/100 km30.9 mpg US37.2 mpg UK
- Best estimated range882 km548 mi
- Largest trunk897 L
- Best overall score67/100
- Best economy score86/100
- Best practicality score92/100
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.5 s
- Most powerful310 hp231 kW
- Best performance score58/100
Specification comparison
| Model | Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P290 | VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 290hp216kW | 310hp231kW |
| Torque | 400Nm295lb-ft | 400Nm295lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,882kg4,149lb | 2,146kg4,731lb |
| Top speed | 233 km/h 145 mph | 230 km/h 143 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 89.6s99% target: 231 km/h / 143 mph Calculated | 81.0s99% target: 228 km/h / 141 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.4s | 6.5s |
| 0-200 km/h | 32.5s Calculated | 30.3s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.0s Calculated | 6.1s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 7.6L/100 km30.9mpg US37.2mpg UK | 8.3L/100 km28.3mpg US34.0mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | - | 10.3L/100 km22.8mpg US27.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | - | 7.1L/100 km33.1mpg US39.8mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.3s Calculated | 14.6s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 154hp/t115kW/t70hp/1000 lb Calculated | 144hp/t108kW/t66hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 213Nm/t142lb-ft/ton Calculated | 186Nm/t125lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 882km548mi Calculated | 855km532mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,997cc122cu in | 1,969cc120cu in |
| Length | 4,597mm181in | 4,950mm195in |
| Width | - | 1,923mm76in |
| Height | 1,727mm68in | 1,776mm70in |
| Wheelbase | 2,741mm108in | 2,984mm117in |
| Front track | 1,636mm64in | 1,673mm66in |
| Rear track | 1,643mm65in | 1,675mm66in |
| Ground clearance | 212mm8in | 238mm9in |
| Trunk volume | 897L | 314L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,794L | 1,886L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 67L | 71L |
| CO2 emissions | - | 192g/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 P290: Power / Torque
- Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P290 | 5,500 rpm | 1,500-4,500 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 5,700 rpm | 2,220-5,100 rpm | 6,000 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P290 | VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.0 s | 6.1 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.4 s | 6.5 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 32.5 s | 30.3 s |
| Top speed | 233 km/h 145 mph | 230 km/h 143 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.5 s | 2.3 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.6 s | 6.3 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.0 s | 9.5 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.9 s | 12.3 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.3 s | 14.6 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 150 km/h 93 mph | 155 km/h 96 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P290 | 290 hp 216 kW |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 310 hp 231 kW |
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6 has 20 hp more than Land Rover Discovery Sport Facelift 2019 2.0 P290.
The biggest power difference is between Land Rover Discovery Sport Facelift 2019 2.0 P290 and Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6: 20 hp (15 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P290 | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P290 | 1,882 kg 4,149 lb |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 2,146 kg 4,731 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 P290 | 233 km/h 145 mph |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 230 km/h 143 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 P290 | 7.4 s |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 6.5 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6 and Land Rover Discovery Sport Facelift 2019 2.0 P290: 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 P290 | 7.6 L/100 km 30.9 mpg US 37.2 mpg UK |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Land Rover Discovery Sport Facelift 2019 2.0 P290 and Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6: 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 P290 | 154 hp/t 115 kW/t 6.5 kg/hp |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 144 hp/t 108 kW/t 6.9 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P290 | 882 km 548 mi |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 855 km 532 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P290 | 290 hp 216 kW | 7.4 s | 233 km/h 145 mph |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 310 hp 231 kW | 6.5 s | 230 km/h 143 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 P290 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 P290 |
| 7.6 L/100 km 30.9 mpg US 37.2 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 |
| 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK | ||||||
Volvo XC90 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.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P290 | 7.6 L/100 km 30.9 mpg US 37.2 mpg UK | 7.4 s |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK | 6.5 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 P290 | 154 hp/t 115 kW/t 6.5 kg/hp | 7.6 L/100 km 30.9 mpg US 37.2 mpg UK |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 144 hp/t 108 kW/t 6.9 kg/hp | 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Land RoverDiscovery SportFacelift 20192.0 P290 | VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 290 hp 216 kW | 310 hp 231 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.4 s | 6.5 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 233 km/h 145 mph | 230 km/h 143 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,882 kg 4,149 lb | 2,146 kg 4,731 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 7.6 L/100 km 30.9 mpg US 37.2 mpg UK | 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 882 km 548 mi | 855 km 532 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | - | 192 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 897 L 31.7 cu ft | 314 L 11.1 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 154 hp/t 115 kW/t 6.5 kg/hp | 144 hp/t 108 kW/t 6.9 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 P290 | Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 7.6 L/100 km30.9 mpg US37.2 mpg UK | 8.3 L/100 km28.3 mpg US34 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 13.30 LC100 km | 14.53 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 21.40 LC100 mi | 23.38 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,140 L301 US gal251 UK gal | 1,245 L329 US gal274 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,995 LC/year | 2,179 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Land Rover Discovery Sport Facelift 2019 2.0 P290
- Is 264 kg lighter
- Has 3 km/h (2 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 0.7 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 10 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 26 km (16 mi) more estimated range
- Has 583 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6
- Has 20 hp more
- Is 0.9 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Most powerful
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























