Volvo XC90 II
Car comparison
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5vsLexus NX I (AZ10) · Facelift 2017 300
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonLexus NX I (AZ10) · Facelift 2017
300
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5
- Fastest top speed220 km/h137 mph
- Highest torque480 Nm354 lb-ft
- Lowest combined fuel consumption6.2 L/100 km37.9 mpg US45.6 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption7.2 L/100 km32.7 mpg US39.2 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption5.6 L/100 km42.0 mpg US50.4 mpg UK
- Best estimated range1,145 km712 mi
- Best performance score51/100
- Best economy score90/100
Lexus NX I (AZ10) Facelift 2017 300
- Quickest 0-100 km/h7.4 s
- Most powerful238 hp177 kW
- Lightest1,787 kg3,940 lb
- Best power-to-weight133 hp/t99 kW/t7.5 kg/hp
- Largest trunk501 L
- Best overall score61/100
- Best practicality score84/100
Specification comparison
| Model | VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 235hp175kW | 238hp177kW |
| Torque | 480Nm354lb-ft | 350Nm258lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 2,205kg4,861lb | 1,787kg3,940lb |
| Gross weight | - | 2,309kg5,090lb |
| Top speed | 220 km/h 137 mph | Unrestricted 210 km/h130 mph Restricted 200 km/h124 mph Calculated |
| To 99% top speed | 98.6s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph Calculated | 75.6s99% target: 208 km/h / 129 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.8s | 7.4s |
| 0-200 km/h | 43.6s Calculated | 46.4s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.4s Calculated | 7.0s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 6.2L/100 km37.9mpg US45.6mpg UK | 9.4L/100 km25mpg US30.1mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 7.2L/100 km32.7mpg US39.2mpg UK | 10.7L/100 km22mpg US26.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 5.6L/100 km42mpg US50.4mpg UK | 8.4L/100 km28mpg US33.6mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.7s Calculated | 15.4s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 107hp/t79kW/t48hp/1000 lb Calculated | 133hp/t99kW/t60hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 218Nm/t146lb-ft/ton Calculated | 196Nm/t131lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 1,145km712mi Calculated | 638km397mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,969cc120cu in | 1,998cc122cu in |
| Length | 4,950mm195in | 4,638mm183in |
| Width | 1,923mm76in | 1,869mm74in |
| Height | 1,776mm70in | 1,646mm65in |
| Wheelbase | 2,984mm117in | 2,659mm105in |
| Front track | 1,673mm66in | - |
| Rear track | 1,675mm66in | - |
| Ground clearance | 238mm9in | 175mm7in |
| Trunk volume | 314L | 501L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,886L | - |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 71L | 60L |
| CO2 emissions | 162g/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 D5: Power / Torque
- Lexus NX I (AZ10) Facelift 2017 300: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 4,000 rpm | 1,740-2,220 rpm | 5,000 rpm |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | 4,800-5,600 rpm | 1,650-4,000 rpm | 5,850 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.4 s | 7.0 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.8 s | 7.4 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 43.6 s | 46.4 s |
| Top speed | 220 km/h 137 mph | Unrestricted 210 km/h130 mph Restricted 200 km/h124 mph Likely limited |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.4 s | 2.5 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.6 s | 6.6 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.1 s | 10.0 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.1 s | 12.9 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.7 s | 15.4 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 144 km/h 89 mph | 147 km/h 91 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 235 hp 175 kW |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | 238 hp 177 kW |
Lexus NX I (AZ10) Facelift 2017 300 has 3 hp more than Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5.
The biggest power difference is between Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5 and Lexus NX I (AZ10) Facelift 2017 300: 3 hp (2 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 480 Nm 354 lb-ft |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 2,205 kg 4,861 lb |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | 1,787 kg 3,940 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 D5 | 220 km/h 137 mph |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | Unrestricted 210 km/h130 mph Restricted 200 km/h124 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 7.8 s |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | 7.4 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Lexus NX I (AZ10) Facelift 2017 300 and Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5: 0.4 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 D5 | 6.2 L/100 km 37.9 mpg US 45.6 mpg UK |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | 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 D5 and Lexus NX I (AZ10) Facelift 2017 300: 3.2 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 107 hp/t 79 kW/t 9.4 kg/hp |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | 133 hp/t 99 kW/t 7.5 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 1,145 km 712 mi |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | 638 km 397 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 235 hp 175 kW | 7.8 s | 220 km/h 137 mph |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | 238 hp 177 kW | 7.4 s | Unrestricted 210 km/h130 mph Restricted 200 km/h124 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 D5 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 D5 |
| 6.2 L/100 km 37.9 mpg US 45.6 mpg UK | ||||||
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 |
| 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | ||||||
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5 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 D5 | 6.2 L/100 km 37.9 mpg US 45.6 mpg UK | 7.8 s |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | 7.4 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 D5 | 107 hp/t 79 kW/t 9.4 kg/hp | 6.2 L/100 km 37.9 mpg US 45.6 mpg UK |
| LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | 133 hp/t 99 kW/t 7.5 kg/hp | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | LexusNX I (AZ10)Facelift 2017300 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 235 hp 175 kW | 238 hp 177 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 480 Nm 354 lb-ft | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.8 s | 7.4 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 220 km/h 137 mph | Unrestricted 210 km/h130 mph Restricted 200 km/h124 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 2,205 kg 4,861 lb | 1,787 kg 3,940 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 6.2 L/100 km 37.9 mpg US 45.6 mpg UK | 9.4 L/100 km 25.0 mpg US 30.1 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 1,145 km 712 mi | 638 km 397 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 162 g/km | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 314 L 11.1 cu ft | 501 L 17.7 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 107 hp/t 79 kW/t 9.4 kg/hp | 133 hp/t 99 kW/t 7.5 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 D5 | Lexus NX I (AZ10) Facelift 2017 300 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 6.2 L/100 km37.9 mpg US45.6 mpg UK | 9.4 L/100 km25 mpg US30.1 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 10.85 LC100 km | 16.45 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 17.46 LC100 mi | 26.47 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 930 L246 US gal205 UK gal | 1,410 L372 US gal310 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,628 LC/year | 2,468 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5
- Has 130 Nm more
- Has 10 km/h (6 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 3.2 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 507 km (315 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Heaviest
- Smallest trunk
Lexus NX I (AZ10) Facelift 2017 300
- Has 3 hp more
- Is 418 kg lighter
- Is 0.4 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 27 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 187 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Most powerful
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























