Volvo XC90 II
Car comparison
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6vsLand Rover Discovery Sport 2.0 Si4
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonLand Rover Discovery Sport
2.0 Si4
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.5 s
- Fastest top speed230 km/h143 mph
- Most powerful310 hp231 kW
- Highest torque400 Nm295 lb-ft
- Lowest combined fuel consumption8.3 L/100 km28.3 mpg US34.0 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption7.1 L/100 km33.1 mpg US39.8 mpg UK
- Best estimated range855 km532 mi
- Best performance score58/100
- Best economy score85/100
Land Rover Discovery Sport 2.0 Si4
- Lightest1,947 kg4,292 lb
- Best power-to-weight149 hp/t111 kW/t6.7 kg/hp
- Lowest city consumption9.8 L/100 km24.0 mpg US28.8 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions190 g/km
- Best overall score67/100
- Best practicality score89/100
Specification comparison
| Model | VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 310hp231kW | 290hp216kW |
| Torque | 400Nm295lb-ft | 400Nm295lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 2,146kg4,731lb | 1,947kg4,292lb |
| Gross weight | - | 2,710kg5,975lb |
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 228 km/h 142 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 81.0s99% target: 228 km/h / 141 mph Calculated | 85.7s99% target: 226 km/h / 140 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 6.5s | 6.7s |
| 0-200 km/h | 30.3s Calculated | 32.7s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 6.1s Calculated | 6.3s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 8.3L/100 km28.3mpg US34.0mpg UK | 8.4L/100 km28mpg US33.6mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 10.3L/100 km22.8mpg US27.4mpg UK | 9.8L/100 km24mpg US28.8mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 7.1L/100 km33.1mpg US39.8mpg UK | 7.3L/100 km32.2mpg US38.7mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 14.6s Calculated | 14.8s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 144hp/t108kW/t66hp/1000 lb Calculated | 149hp/t111kW/t68hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 186Nm/t125lb-ft/ton Calculated | 205Nm/t137lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 855km532mi Calculated | 815km507mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,969cc120cu in | 1,997cc122cu in |
| Length | 4,950mm195in | 4,599mm181in |
| Width | 1,923mm76in | - |
| Height | 1,776mm70in | 1,724mm68in |
| Wheelbase | 2,984mm117in | 2,741mm108in |
| Front track | 1,673mm66in | 1,621mm64in |
| Rear track | 1,675mm66in | 1,630mm64in |
| Ground clearance | 238mm9in | 221mm9in |
| Trunk volume | 314L | - |
| Max trunk volume | 1,886L | - |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 7 |
| Fuel tank | 71L | 69L |
| CO2 emissions | 192g/km | 190g/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 XC90 II 2.0 T6: Power / Torque
- Land Rover Discovery Sport 2.0 Si4: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 5,700 rpm | 2,220-5,100 rpm | 6,000 rpm |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 5,800 rpm | 1,500 rpm | 6,050 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 6.1 s | 6.3 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 6.5 s | 6.7 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 30.3 s | 32.7 s |
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 228 km/h 142 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.3 s | 2.3 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.3 s | 6.3 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.5 s | 9.6 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.3 s | 12.4 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 14.6 s | 14.8 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 155 km/h 96 mph | 152 km/h 95 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 310 hp 231 kW |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 290 hp 216 kW |
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6 has 20 hp more than Land Rover Discovery Sport 2.0 Si4.
The biggest power difference is between Land Rover Discovery Sport 2.0 Si4 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 |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 2,146 kg 4,731 lb |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 1,947 kg 4,292 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 230 km/h 143 mph |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 228 km/h 142 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 6.5 s |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 6.7 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6 and Land Rover Discovery Sport 2.0 Si4: 0.2 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 8.4 L/100 km 28.0 mpg US 33.6 mpg UK |
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 144 hp/t 108 kW/t 6.9 kg/hp |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 149 hp/t 111 kW/t 6.7 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 855 km 532 mi |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 815 km 507 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 310 hp 231 kW | 6.5 s | 230 km/h 143 mph |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 290 hp 216 kW | 6.7 s | 228 km/h 142 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 |
| 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK | ||||||
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 |
| 8.4 L/100 km 28.0 mpg US 33.6 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 |
|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK | 6.5 s |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 8.4 L/100 km 28.0 mpg US 33.6 mpg UK | 6.7 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | 149 hp/t 111 kW/t 6.7 kg/hp | 8.4 L/100 km 28.0 mpg US 33.6 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6 | Land RoverDiscovery Sport2.0 Si4 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 310 hp 231 kW | 290 hp 216 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 6.5 s | 6.7 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 228 km/h 142 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 2,146 kg 4,731 lb | 1,947 kg 4,292 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 8.3 L/100 km 28.3 mpg US 34.0 mpg UK | 8.4 L/100 km 28.0 mpg US 33.6 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 855 km 532 mi | 815 km 507 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 192 g/km | 190 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 314 L 11.1 cu ft | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 144 hp/t 108 kW/t 6.9 kg/hp | 149 hp/t 111 kW/t 6.7 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 | Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6 | Land Rover Discovery Sport 2.0 Si4 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 8.3 L/100 km28.3 mpg US34 mpg UK | 8.4 L/100 km28 mpg US33.6 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 14.53 LC100 km | 14.70 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 23.38 LC100 mi | 23.66 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,245 L329 US gal274 UK gal | 1,260 L333 US gal277 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,179 LC/year | 2,205 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6
- Has 20 hp more
- Is 0.2 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 2 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 0.1 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 40 km (25 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Heaviest
- Highest CO2 emissions
Land Rover Discovery Sport 2.0 Si4
- Is 199 kg lighter
- Has 4 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Emits 2 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























