Car comparison

Subaru Forester IV · Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 TvsLand Rover Range Rover Velar D 240 2.0

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
VS

Land Rover Range Rover Velar

D 240 2.0

240 hp1999 ccDieselAWDAutomaticTurbochargedSUV2017-2020

Comparison overview

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

Best choices

Land Rover Range Rover Velar D 240 2.0

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    7.3 s
  • Highest torque
    500 Nm
    369 lb-ft
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    5.8 L/100 km
    40.6 mpg US
    48.7 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    7.2 L/100 km
    32.7 mpg US
    39.2 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    5.1 L/100 km
    46.1 mpg US
    55.4 mpg UK
  • Lowest CO2 emissions
    154 g/km
  • Best estimated range
    1,034 km
    643 mi
  • Largest trunk
    673 L
  • Best overall score
    66/100
  • Best performance score
    54/100
  • Best economy score
    91/100
  • Best practicality score
    91/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelSubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TLand RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
Power
240hp179kW
240hp179kW
Torque
350Nm258lb-ft
500Nm369lb-ft
Curb weight
1,624kg3,580lb
1,841kg4,059lb
Gross weight
2,110kg4,652lb
-
Top speed
221 km/h
137 mph
217 km/h
135 mph
To 99% top speed
79.3s99% target: 219 km/h / 136 mph
Calculated
84.1s99% target: 215 km/h / 133 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
7.5s
7.3s
0-200 km/h
36.4s
Calculated
40.9s
Calculated
0-60 mph
7.1s
Calculated
6.9s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
8.5L/100 km27.7mpg US33.2mpg UK
5.8L/100 km40.6mpg US48.7mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
11.2L/100 km21mpg US25.2mpg UK
7.2L/100 km32.7mpg US39.2mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
7L/100 km33.6mpg US40.4mpg UK
5.1L/100 km46.1mpg US55.4mpg UK
Quarter mile
15.4s
Calculated
15.3s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
148hp/t110kW/t67hp/1000 lb
Calculated
130hp/t97kW/t59hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
216Nm/t144lb-ft/ton
Calculated
272Nm/t182lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
706km439mi
Calculated
1,034km643mi
Calculated
Displacement
1,998cc122cu in
1,999cc122cu in
Length
4,595mm181in
4,803mm189in
Width
1,795mm71in
-
Height
1,735mm68in
1,665mm66in
Wheelbase
2,640mm104in
2,874mm113in
Front track
1,545mm61in
1,644mm65in
Rear track
1,555mm61in
1,663mm65in
Ground clearance
220mm9in
251mm10in
Trunk volume
505L
673L
Max trunk volume
1,557L
1,731L
Doors
5
5
Seats
5
5
Fuel tank
60L
60L
CO2 emissions
197g/km
154g/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 Velar D 240 2.0PowerTorque
  • Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T: Power / Torque
  • Land Rover Range Rover Velar D 240 2.0: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T5,600 rpm2,400-3,600 rpm5,850 rpm
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.04,000 rpm1,500 rpm4,250 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricSubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TLand RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
7.1 s
6.9 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
7.5 s
7.3 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
36.4 s
40.9 s
Top speed
221 km/h
137 mph
217 km/h
135 mph
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.5 s
2.4 s
330 ft
101 m
6.7 s
6.5 s
1/8 mile
201 m
10.1 s
9.9 s
1000 ft
305 m
13.0 s
12.8 s
1/4 mile
402 m
15.4 s
15.3 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
149 km/h
93 mph
147 km/h
91 mph

Power comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T
240 hp
179 kW
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
240 hp
179 kW

Torque comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T
350 Nm
258 lb-ft
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
500 Nm
369 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T
1,624 kg
3,580 lb
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
1,841 kg
4,059 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T
221 km/h
137 mph
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
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
VehicleValue
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T7.5 s
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.07.3 s

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Land Rover Range Rover Velar D 240 2.0 and Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T: 0.2 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T
8.5 L/100 km
27.7 mpg US
33.2 mpg UK
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
5.8 L/100 km
40.6 mpg US
48.7 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Land Rover Range Rover Velar D 240 2.0 and Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T: 2.7 L/100 km.

Power-to-weight comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T
148 hp/t
110 kW/t
6.8 kg/hp
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
130 hp/t
97 kW/t
7.7 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T
706 km
439 mi
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
1,034 km
643 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T
240 hp
179 kW
7.5 s
221 km/h
137 mph
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
240 hp
179 kW
7.3 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.

Chart data table
VehiclePerformance scorePracticality score
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T
Power
240 hp
179 kW
0-100 km/h7.5 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 VelarD 240 2.0
Power
240 hp
179 kW
0-100 km/h7.3 s
Top speed
217 km/h
135 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
673 L
23.8 cu ft
Length
4,803 mm
189.1 in
Height
1,665 mm
65.6 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
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T
Power
240 hp
179 kW
0-100 km/h7.5 s
Top speed
221 km/h
137 mph
8.5 L/100 km
27.7 mpg US
33.2 mpg UK
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
Power
240 hp
179 kW
0-100 km/h7.3 s
Top speed
217 km/h
135 mph
5.8 L/100 km
40.6 mpg US
48.7 mpg UK

Land Rover Range Rover Velar D 240 2.0 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
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 VelarD 240 2.0
5.8 L/100 km
40.6 mpg US
48.7 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
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 VelarD 240 2.0
130 hp/t
97 kW/t
7.7 kg/hp
5.8 L/100 km
40.6 mpg US
48.7 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleSubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TLand RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0
Power
240 hp
179 kW
240 hp
179 kW
Torque
350 Nm
258 lb-ft
500 Nm
369 lb-ft
Acceleration
7.5 s
7.3 s
Top speed
221 km/h
137 mph
217 km/h
135 mph
Lightness
1,624 kg
3,580 lb
1,841 kg
4,059 lb
Fuel consumption
8.5 L/100 km
27.7 mpg US
33.2 mpg UK
5.8 L/100 km
40.6 mpg US
48.7 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
673 L
23.8 cu ft
Length
4,803 mm
189.1 in
Height
1,665 mm
65.6 in
Range score
706 km
439 mi
1,034 km
643 mi
CO2 score
197 g/km
154 g/km
Trunk score
505 L
17.8 cu ft
673 L
23.8 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
148 hp/t
110 kW/t
6.8 kg/hp
130 hp/t
97 kW/t
7.7 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

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleSubaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 TLand Rover Range Rover Velar D 240 2.0
Consumption8.5 L/100 km27.7 mpg US33.2 mpg UK5.8 L/100 km40.6 mpg US48.7 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km14.88 LC100 km10.15 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi23.94 LC100 mi16.33 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,275 L337 US gal280 UK gal870 L230 US gal191 UK gal
Annual fuel cost2,231 LC/year1,523 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T

  • Is 217 kg lighter
  • Has 4 km/h (2 mph) higher top speed
  • Has 17 hp/t better power-to-weight

Pros

  • Highest top speed
  • Most powerful
  • Lightest
  • Best power-to-weight ratio

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Smallest trunk
  • Highest CO2 emissions

Land Rover Range Rover Velar D 240 2.0

  • Has 150 Nm more
  • Is 0.2 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Uses 2.7 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 329 km (204 mi) more estimated range
  • Has 168 L more trunk volume
  • Emits 43 g/km less CO2

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Highest torque
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best estimated range
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Heaviest
  • Lowest top speed

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Subaru Forester IV Sport 2.0 T
Land Rover Range Rover Velar D 240 2.0
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

Sport 2.0 T
2.0
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsSubaruForester IV2.0
D 240 2.0
2.0 D240
VS
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0vsJaguarE-Pace2.0 D240
Sport 2.0 T
2.5 Turbo
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsSubaruForester IIIFacelift 20102.5 Turbo
D 240 2.0
2.0 D5
VS
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0vsVolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
Sport 2.0 T
2.5 XT
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsSubaruForester III2.5 XT
D 240 2.0
2.0d
VS
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0vsJaguarF-Pace2.0d
Sport 2.0 T
2.5 i 16V Turbo
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsSubaruForester II2.5 i 16V Turbo
D 240 2.0
300
VS
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0vsLexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300
D 240 2.0
2.0 D5
VS
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0vsVolvoXC90 II2.0 D5
Sport 2.0 T
2.0 BiTDI
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsVolkswagenTiguan II2.0 BiTDI
D 240 2.0
2.0i
VS
Land RoverRange Rover VelarD 240 2.0vsJaguarF-PaceFacelift 20202.0i
Sport 2.0 T
2.0
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsPorscheMacan I (95B)2.0
Subaru Forester IV · Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T vs Land Rover Range Rover Velar D 240 2.0 - car comparison - FastVsFaster