Land Rover Range Rover Velar · Facelift 2020
Car comparison
Land Rover Range Rover Velar · Facelift 2020 2.0 D200vsVolvo XC60 II 2.0 B4
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolvo XC60 II
2.0 B4
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Land Rover Range Rover Velar Facelift 2020 2.0 D200
- Quickest 0-100 km/h8.2 s
- Fastest top speed210 km/h130 mph
- Most powerful204 hp152 kW
- Highest torque430 Nm317 lb-ft
- Lightest1,928 kg4,251 lb
- Best power-to-weight106 hp/t79 kW/t9.5 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption5.3 L/100 km44.4 mpg US53.3 mpg UK
- Largest trunk748 L
- Best overall score62/100
- Best performance score48/100
- Best economy score93/100
- Best practicality score92/100
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 B4
- Best estimated range1,203 km748 mi
Specification comparison
| Model | Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 204hp152kW | 197hp147kW |
| Torque | 430Nm317lb-ft | 420Nm310lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,928kg4,251lb | 1,950kg4,299lb |
| Top speed | 210 km/h 130 mph | 205 km/h 127 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 92.2s99% target: 208 km/h / 129 mph Calculated | 86.3s99% target: 203 km/h / 126 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.2s | 8.3s |
| 0-200 km/h | 55.4s Calculated | 66.5s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.7s Calculated | 7.8s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 5.3L/100 km44.4mpg US53.3mpg UK | 5.9L/100 km39.9mpg US47.9mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 16.0s Calculated | 16.0s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 106hp/t79kW/t48hp/1000 lb Calculated | 101hp/t75kW/t46hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 223Nm/t149lb-ft/ton Calculated | 215Nm/t144lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 1,132km703mi Calculated | 1,203km748mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,997cc122cu in | 1,969cc120cu in |
| Length | 4,797mm189in | 4,688mm185in |
| Width | 2,041mm80in | 1,902mm75in |
| Height | 1,683mm66in | 1,658mm65in |
| Wheelbase | 2,874mm113in | 2,865mm113in |
| Front track | 1,644mm65in | 1,668mm66in |
| Rear track | 1,663mm65in | 1,673mm66in |
| Ground clearance | 251mm10in | 216mm9in |
| Trunk volume | 748L | 505L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,811L | 1,432L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 60L | 71L |
| CO2 emissions | - | 155g/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 Range Rover Velar Facelift 2020 2.0 D200: Power / Torque
- Volvo XC60 II 2.0 B4: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 4,250 rpm | 1,750-2,500 rpm | 4,500 rpm |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 4,000 rpm | 1,740-2,760 rpm | 5,000 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.7 s | 7.8 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.2 s | 8.3 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 55.4 s | 66.5 s |
| Top speed | 210 km/h 130 mph | 205 km/h 127 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.5 s | 2.5 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.8 s | 6.8 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.3 s | 10.4 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.4 s | 13.5 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 16.0 s | 16.0 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 141 km/h 87 mph | 140 km/h 87 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 204 hp 152 kW |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 197 hp 147 kW |
Land Rover Range Rover Velar Facelift 2020 2.0 D200 has 7 hp more than Volvo XC60 II 2.0 B4.
The biggest power difference is between Volvo XC60 II 2.0 B4 and Land Rover Range Rover Velar Facelift 2020 2.0 D200: 7 hp (5 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 430 Nm 317 lb-ft |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 420 Nm 310 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 1,928 kg 4,251 lb |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 1,950 kg 4,299 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 210 km/h 130 mph |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 205 km/h 127 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 8.2 s |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 8.3 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Land Rover Range Rover Velar Facelift 2020 2.0 D200 and Volvo XC60 II 2.0 B4: 0.1 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 5.3 L/100 km 44.4 mpg US 53.3 mpg UK |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Land Rover Range Rover Velar Facelift 2020 2.0 D200 and Volvo XC60 II 2.0 B4: 0.6 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 106 hp/t 79 kW/t 9.5 kg/hp |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 101 hp/t 75 kW/t 9.9 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 1,132 km 703 mi |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 1,203 km 748 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 204 hp 152 kW | 8.2 s | 210 km/h 130 mph |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 197 hp 147 kW | 8.3 s | 205 km/h 127 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 RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 |
| 5.3 L/100 km 44.4 mpg US 53.3 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 |
| 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | ||||||
Land Rover Range Rover Velar Facelift 2020 2.0 D200 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 RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 5.3 L/100 km 44.4 mpg US 53.3 mpg UK | 8.2 s |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | 8.3 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 RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | 106 hp/t 79 kW/t 9.5 kg/hp | 5.3 L/100 km 44.4 mpg US 53.3 mpg UK |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | 101 hp/t 75 kW/t 9.9 kg/hp | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | Land RoverRange Rover VelarFacelift 20202.0 D200 | VolvoXC60 II2.0 B4 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 204 hp 152 kW | 197 hp 147 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 430 Nm 317 lb-ft | 420 Nm 310 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.2 s | 8.3 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 210 km/h 130 mph | 205 km/h 127 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,928 kg 4,251 lb | 1,950 kg 4,299 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 5.3 L/100 km 44.4 mpg US 53.3 mpg UK | 5.9 L/100 km 39.9 mpg US 47.9 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 1,132 km 703 mi | 1,203 km 748 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | - | 155 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 748 L 26.4 cu ft | 505 L 17.8 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 106 hp/t 79 kW/t 9.5 kg/hp | 101 hp/t 75 kW/t 9.9 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 Range Rover Velar Facelift 2020 2.0 D200 | Volvo XC60 II 2.0 B4 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 5.3 L/100 km44.4 mpg US53.3 mpg UK | 5.9 L/100 km39.9 mpg US47.9 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 9.28 LC100 km | 10.33 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 14.93 LC100 mi | 16.62 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 795 L210 US gal175 UK gal | 885 L234 US gal195 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,391 LC/year | 1,549 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Land Rover Range Rover Velar Facelift 2020 2.0 D200
- Has 7 hp more
- Has 10 Nm more
- Is 22 kg lighter
- Is 0.1 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 5 km/h (3 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 0.6 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 5 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 243 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Largest trunk
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 B4
- Has 71 km (44 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























