Car comparison

Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6vsLand Rover Range Rover Sport II · Facelift 2017 2.0 Si4

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

New comparison

Volvo XC90 II

2.0 T6

310 hp1969 ccGasolineAWDAutomaticTurbo + superchargedSUV2018-2019
VS

Land Rover Range Rover Sport II · Facelift 2017

2.0 Si4

300 hp1997 ccGasolineAWDAutomaticTurbochargedSUV2017-2021

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/h
    6.5 s
  • Fastest top speed
    230 km/h
    143 mph
  • Most powerful
    310 hp
    231 kW
  • Highest torque
    400 Nm
    295 lb-ft
  • Best power-to-weight
    144 hp/t
    108 kW/t
    6.9 kg/hp
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    8.3 L/100 km
    28.3 mpg US
    34.0 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    10.3 L/100 km
    22.8 mpg US
    27.4 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    7.1 L/100 km
    33.1 mpg US
    39.8 mpg UK
  • Lowest CO2 emissions
    192 g/km
  • Largest trunk
    314 L
  • Best overall score
    65/100
  • Best performance score
    58/100
  • Best economy score
    85/100
  • Best practicality score
    79/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelVolvoXC90 II2.0 T6Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
Power
310hp231kW
300hp224kW
Torque
400Nm295lb-ft
400Nm295lb-ft
Curb weight
2,146kg4,731lb
2,083kg4,592lb
Gross weight-
3,000kg6,614lb
Top speed
230 km/h
143 mph
201 km/h
125 mph
To 99% top speed
80.8s99% target: 228 km/h / 141 mph
Calculated
79.4s99% target: 199 km/h / 124 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
6.5s
7.3s
0-200 km/h
30.2s
Calculated
94.8s
Calculated
0-60 mph
6.1s
Calculated
6.9s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
8.3L/100 km28.3mpg US34.0mpg UK
9.4L/100 km25mpg US30.1mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
10.3L/100 km22.8mpg US27.4mpg UK
11.4L/100 km20.6mpg US24.8mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
7.1L/100 km33.1mpg US39.8mpg UK
8.2L/100 km28.7mpg US34.4mpg UK
Quarter mile
14.6s
Calculated
15.4s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
144hp/t108kW/t66hp/1000 lb
Calculated
144hp/t107kW/t65hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
186Nm/t125lb-ft/ton
Calculated
192Nm/t128lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
855km532mi
Calculated
1,106km687mi
Calculated
Displacement
1,969cc120cu in
1,997cc122cu in
Length
4,950mm195in
4,879mm192in
Width
1,923mm76in
2,073mm82in
Height
1,776mm70in
1,803mm71in
Wheelbase
2,984mm117in
2,923mm115in
Front track
1,673mm66in
1,693mm67in
Rear track
1,675mm66in
1,686mm66in
Ground clearance
238mm9in
278mm11in
Trunk volume
314L
221L
Max trunk volume
1,886L
1,686L
Doors
5
5
Seats
5
7
Fuel tank
71L
104L
CO2 emissions
192g/km
214g/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 T6Land Rover Range Rover Sport II Facelift 2017 2.0 Si4PowerTorque
  • Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6: Power / Torque
  • Land Rover Range Rover Sport II Facelift 2017 2.0 Si4: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T65,700 rpm2,220-5,100 rpm6,000 rpm
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si45,500 rpm1,500-4,000 rpm5,750 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricVolvoXC90 II2.0 T6Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
6.1 s
6.9 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
6.5 s
7.3 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
30.2 s
94.8 s
Top speed
230 km/h
143 mph
201 km/h
125 mph
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.3 s
2.3 s
330 ft
101 m
6.3 s
6.4 s
1/8 mile
201 m
9.5 s
9.8 s
1000 ft
305 m
12.3 s
12.8 s
1/4 mile
402 m
14.6 s
15.4 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
155 km/h
96 mph
143 km/h
89 mph

Power comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
310 hp
231 kW
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
300 hp
224 kW

Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6 has 10 hp more than Land Rover Range Rover Sport II Facelift 2017 2.0 Si4.

The biggest power difference is between Land Rover Range Rover Sport II Facelift 2017 2.0 Si4 and Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6: 10 hp (7 kW).

Torque comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
400 Nm
295 lb-ft
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
400 Nm
295 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
2,146 kg
4,731 lb
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
2,083 kg
4,592 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
230 km/h
143 mph
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
201 km/h
125 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T66.5 s
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si47.3 s

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6 and Land Rover Range Rover Sport II Facelift 2017 2.0 Si4: 0.8 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
8.3 L/100 km
28.3 mpg US
34.0 mpg UK
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
9.4 L/100 km
25.0 mpg US
30.1 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6 and Land Rover Range Rover Sport II Facelift 2017 2.0 Si4: 1.1 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
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
144 hp/t
108 kW/t
6.9 kg/hp
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
144 hp/t
107 kW/t
6.9 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
855 km
532 mi
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
1,106 km
687 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
310 hp
231 kW
6.5 s
230 km/h
143 mph
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
300 hp
224 kW
7.3 s
201 km/h
125 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
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
Power
310 hp
231 kW
0-100 km/h6.5 s
Top speed
230 km/h
143 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
314 L
11.1 cu ft
Length
4,950 mm
194.9 in
Height
1,776 mm
69.9 in
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
Power
300 hp
224 kW
0-100 km/h7.3 s
Top speed
201 km/h
125 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
7 seats
Trunk
221 L
7.8 cu ft
Length
4,879 mm
192.1 in
Height
1,803 mm
71.0 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
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
Power
310 hp
231 kW
0-100 km/h6.5 s
Top speed
230 km/h
143 mph
8.3 L/100 km
28.3 mpg US
34.0 mpg UK
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
Power
300 hp
224 kW
0-100 km/h7.3 s
Top speed
201 km/h
125 mph
9.4 L/100 km
25.0 mpg US
30.1 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.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6
8.3 L/100 km
28.3 mpg US
34.0 mpg UK
6.5 s
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
9.4 L/100 km
25.0 mpg US
30.1 mpg UK
7.3 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
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 RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
144 hp/t
107 kW/t
6.9 kg/hp
9.4 L/100 km
25.0 mpg US
30.1 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleVolvoXC90 II2.0 T6Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4
Power
310 hp
231 kW
300 hp
224 kW
Torque
400 Nm
295 lb-ft
400 Nm
295 lb-ft
Acceleration
6.5 s
7.3 s
Top speed
230 km/h
143 mph
201 km/h
125 mph
Lightness
2,146 kg
4,731 lb
2,083 kg
4,592 lb
Fuel consumption
8.3 L/100 km
28.3 mpg US
34.0 mpg UK
9.4 L/100 km
25.0 mpg US
30.1 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
314 L
11.1 cu ft
Length
4,950 mm
194.9 in
Height
1,776 mm
69.9 in
Doors/seats
5 doors
7 seats
Trunk
221 L
7.8 cu ft
Length
4,879 mm
192.1 in
Height
1,803 mm
71.0 in
Range score
855 km
532 mi
1,106 km
687 mi
CO2 score
192 g/km
214 g/km
Trunk score
314 L
11.1 cu ft
221 L
7.8 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
144 hp/t
108 kW/t
6.9 kg/hp
144 hp/t
107 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

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleVolvo XC90 II 2.0 T6Land Rover Range Rover Sport II Facelift 2017 2.0 Si4
Consumption8.3 L/100 km28.3 mpg US34 mpg UK9.4 L/100 km25 mpg US30.1 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km14.53 LC100 km16.45 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi23.38 LC100 mi26.47 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,245 L329 US gal274 UK gal1,410 L372 US gal310 UK gal
Annual fuel cost2,179 LC/year2,468 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6

  • Has 10 hp more
  • Is 0.8 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 29 km/h (18 mph) higher top speed
  • Uses 1.1 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 0 hp/t better power-to-weight
  • Has 93 L more trunk volume
  • Emits 22 g/km less CO2

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Highest top speed
  • Most powerful
  • Highest torque
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best power-to-weight ratio
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Heaviest

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6
Land Rover Range Rover Sport II 2.0 Si4
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

2.0 T6
4.4 V8
VS
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6vsVolvoXC90Facelift 20074.4 V8
2.0 Si4
530 V6
VS
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4vsVolkswagenTeramontFacelift 2021530 V6
2.0 T6
2.0 T6
VS
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6vsVolvoXC60 II2.0 T6
2.0 Si4
2.0 P300
VS
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4vsJaguarE-Pace2.0 P300
2.0 T6
2.0 T5
VS
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6vsVolvoXC402.0 T5
2.0 Si4
3.0d
VS
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4vsJaguarF-PaceFacelift 20203.0d
2.0 Si4
3.6
VS
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4vsCadillacXT53.6
2.0 Si4
30d V6
VS
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4vsJaguarF-Pace30d V6
2.0 Si4
530 TSI V6
VS
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4vsVolkswagenTalagon530 TSI V6
2.0 Si4
50 TFSI V6
VS
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4vsAUDIQ650 TFSI V6
2.0 T6
3.0 V6 TSI
VS
VolvoXC90 II2.0 T6vsVolkswagenTouareg II (7P)Facelift 20143.0 V6 TSI
2.0 Si4
50 71 kWh
VS
Land RoverRange Rover Sport IIFacelift 20172.0 Si4vsAUDIe-tron50 71 kWh
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 T6 vs Land Rover Range Rover Sport II · Facelift 2017 2.0 Si4 - car comparison - FastVsFaster