Car comparison

Subaru Forester IV · Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 TvsLand Rover Range Rover Evoque I · Facelift 2015 2.0 Si4

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

New comparison

Subaru Forester IV · Facelift 2016

Sport 2.0 T

240 hp1998 ccGasolineAWDAutomaticTurbochargedSUV2016-2018

Land Rover Range Rover Evoque I · Facelift 2015

2.0 Si4

240 hp1999 ccGasolineAWDAutomaticTurbochargedSUV2015-2018

Comparison overview

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

Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T

Quickest 0-100 km/h
7.5 s
Fastest top speed
221 km/h
137 mph
Most powerful
240 hp
179 kW
Highest torque
350 Nm
258 lb-ft
Lightest
1,624 kg
3,580 lb
Best power-to-weight
148 hp/t
110 kW/t
6.8 kg/hp
Best overall score
63/100
Best performance score
52/100

Land Rover Range Rover Evoque I Facelift 2015 2.0 Si4

Lowest combined fuel consumption
7.8 L/100 km
30.2 mpg US
36.2 mpg UK
Lowest city consumption
10.3 L/100 km
22.8 mpg US
27.4 mpg UK
Lowest highway consumption
6.4 L/100 km
36.8 mpg US
44.1 mpg UK
Lowest CO2 emissions
181 g/km
Best estimated range
897 km
558 mi
Best economy score
86/100
Best practicality score
89/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
Model	SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4
Power	240hp179kW	240hp179kW
Torque	350Nm258lb-ft	340Nm251lb-ft
Curb weight	1,624kg3,580lb	1,658kg3,655lb
Gross weight	2,110kg4,652lb	-
Top speed	221 km/h 137 mph	217 km/h 135 mph
To 99% top speed	79.1s99% target: 219 km/h / 136 mph Calculated	86.9s99% target: 215 km/h / 133 mph Calculated
0-100 km/h	7.5s	7.6s
0-200 km/h	36.4s Calculated	42.4s Calculated
0-60 mph	7.1s Calculated	7.2s Calculated
Fuel consumption	8.5L/100 km27.7mpg US33.2mpg UK	7.8L/100 km30.2mpg US36.2mpg UK
Fuel consumption city	11.2L/100 km21mpg US25.2mpg UK	10.3L/100 km22.8mpg US27.4mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway	7L/100 km33.6mpg US40.4mpg UK	6.4L/100 km36.8mpg US44.1mpg UK
Quarter mile	15.4s Calculated	15.5s Calculated
Power-to-weight	148hp/t110kW/t67hp/1000 lb Calculated	145hp/t108kW/t66hp/1000 lb Calculated
Torque-to-weight	216Nm/t144lb-ft/ton Calculated	205Nm/t137lb-ft/ton Calculated
Estimated range	706km439mi Calculated	897km558mi Calculated
Displacement	1,998cc122cu in	1,999cc122cu in
Length	4,595mm181in	4,371mm172in
Width	1,795mm71in	1,985mm78in
Height	1,735mm68in	1,660mm65in
Wheelbase	2,640mm104in	2,660mm105in
Front track	1,545mm61in	1,625mm64in
Rear track	1,555mm61in	1,629mm64in
Ground clearance	220mm9in	-
Trunk volume	505L	-
Max trunk volume	1,557L	-
Doors	5	5
Seats	5	5
Fuel tank	60L	70L
CO2 emissions	197g/km	181g/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.

Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 TLand Rover Range Rover Evoque I Facelift 2015 2.0 Si4PowerTorque

Dyno simulation data table
Vehicle	Peak power RPM	Peak torque RPM	Max engine speed
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	5,600 rpm	2,400-3,600 rpm	5,850 rpm
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	5,800 rpm	1,750 rpm	6,050 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
Metric	SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4
	Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h	7.1 s	7.2 s
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph	7.5 s	7.6 s
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph	36.4 s	42.4 s
Top speed	221 km/h 137 mph	217 km/h 135 mph
	Drag race simulation
60 ft 18 m	2.5 s	2.5 s
330 ft 101 m	6.7 s	6.6 s
1/8 mile 201 m	10.1 s	10.1 s
1000 ft 305 m	13.0 s	13.0 s
1/4 mile 402 m	15.4 s	15.5 s
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m	149 km/h 93 mph	146 km/h 91 mph

Power comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	240 hp 179 kW
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	240 hp 179 kW

Torque comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	350 Nm 258 lb-ft
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	340 Nm 251 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	1,624 kg 3,580 lb
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	1,658 kg 3,655 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	221 km/h 137 mph
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	217 km/h 135 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	7.5 s
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	7.6 s

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T and Land Rover Range Rover Evoque I Facelift 2015 2.0 Si4: 0.1 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	8.5 L/100 km 27.7 mpg US 33.2 mpg UK
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	7.8 L/100 km 30.2 mpg US 36.2 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Land Rover Range Rover Evoque I Facelift 2015 2.0 Si4 and Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T: 0.7 L/100 km.

Power-to-weight comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	148 hp/t 110 kW/t 6.8 kg/hp
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	145 hp/t 108 kW/t 6.9 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	706 km 439 mi
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	897 km 558 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
Vehicle	Power	Acceleration	Top speed
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	240 hp 179 kW	7.5 s	221 km/h 137 mph
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	240 hp 179 kW	7.6 s	217 km/h 135 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

SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T

Power	240 hp 179 kW
0-100 km/h	7.5 s
Top speed 221 km/h 137 mph

Doors/seats	5 doors 5 seats
Trunk	505 L 17.8 cu ft
Length	4,595 mm 180.9 in
Height	1,735 mm 68.3 in

Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4

Power	240 hp 179 kW
0-100 km/h	7.6 s
Top speed 217 km/h 135 mph

Doors/seats	5 doors 5 seats
Trunk	-
Length	4,371 mm 172.1 in
Height	1,660 mm 65.4 in

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

SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T

Power	240 hp 179 kW
0-100 km/h	7.5 s
Top speed 221 km/h 137 mph

8.5 L/100 km

27.7 mpg US

33.2 mpg UK

Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4

Power	240 hp 179 kW
0-100 km/h	7.6 s
Top speed 217 km/h 135 mph

7.8 L/100 km

30.2 mpg US

36.2 mpg UK

Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T 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
Vehicle	Fuel consumption, L/100 km	0-100 km/h, s
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	8.5 L/100 km 27.7 mpg US 33.2 mpg UK	7.5 s
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	7.8 L/100 km 30.2 mpg US 36.2 mpg UK	7.6 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
Vehicle	Power-to-weight, hp/t	Fuel consumption, L/100 km
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T	148 hp/t 110 kW/t 6.8 kg/hp	8.5 L/100 km 27.7 mpg US 33.2 mpg UK
Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4	145 hp/t 108 kW/t 6.9 kg/hp	7.8 L/100 km 30.2 mpg US 36.2 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Vehicle

SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T

Land RoverRange Rover Evoque IFacelift 20152.0 Si4

Power

240 hp

179 kW

240 hp

179 kW

Torque

350 Nm

258 lb-ft

340 Nm

251 lb-ft

Acceleration

7.5 s

7.6 s

Top speed

221 km/h

137 mph

217 km/h

135 mph

Lightness

1,624 kg

3,580 lb

1,658 kg

3,655 lb

Fuel consumption

8.5 L/100 km

27.7 mpg US

33.2 mpg UK

7.8 L/100 km

30.2 mpg US

36.2 mpg UK

Practicality

Doors/seats	5 doors 5 seats
Trunk	505 L 17.8 cu ft
Length	4,595 mm 180.9 in
Height	1,735 mm 68.3 in

Doors/seats	5 doors 5 seats
Trunk	-
Length	4,371 mm 172.1 in
Height	1,660 mm 65.4 in

Range score

706 km

439 mi

897 km

558 mi

CO2 score

197 g/km

181 g/km

Trunk score

505 L

17.8 cu ft

Power-to-weight score

148 hp/t

110 kW/t

6.8 kg/hp

145 hp/t

108 kW/t

6.9 kg/hp

Overall

Fixed score

Fuel cost and annual usage

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

Average annual distanceDistance unitFuel price in your local currencyPrice unit

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
Vehicle	Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T	Land Rover Range Rover Evoque I Facelift 2015 2.0 Si4
Consumption	8.5 L/100 km27.7 mpg US33.2 mpg UK	7.8 L/100 km30.2 mpg US36.2 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km	14.88 LC100 km	13.65 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi	23.94 LC100 mi	21.97 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used	1,275 L337 US gal280 UK gal	1,170 L309 US gal257 UK gal
Annual fuel cost	2,231 LC/year	2,048 LC/year