Skoda Kodiaq I
Car comparison
Skoda Kodiaq I RS 2.0 BiTDIvsVolvo XC90 II 2.0 D5
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolvo XC90 II
2.0 D5
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Skoda Kodiaq I RS 2.0 BiTDI
- Quickest 0-100 km/h7.0 s
- Fastest top speed220 km/h137 mph
- Most powerful240 hp179 kW
- Highest torque500 Nm369 lb-ft
- Lightest1,941 kg4,279 lb
- Best power-to-weight124 hp/t92 kW/t8.1 kg/hp
- Best overall score61/100
- Best performance score55/100
- Best economy score90/100
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5
- 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
- Lowest CO2 emissions162 g/km
- Best estimated range1,145 km712 mi
- Largest trunk314 L
- Best practicality score79/100
Specification comparison
| Model | SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 240hp179kW | 235hp175kW |
| Torque | 500Nm369lb-ft | 480Nm354lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,941kg4,279lb | 2,205kg4,861lb |
| Gross weight | 2,529kg5,575lb | - |
| Top speed | 220 km/h 137 mph | 220 km/h 137 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 81.0s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph Calculated | 98.8s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.0s | 7.8s |
| 0-200 km/h | 36.9s Calculated | 43.7s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 6.6s Calculated | 7.4s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 6.4L/100 km36.8mpg US44.1mpg UK | 6.2L/100 km37.9mpg US45.6mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 7.4L/100 km31.8mpg US38.2mpg UK | 7.2L/100 km32.7mpg US39.2mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 5.8L/100 km40.6mpg US48.7mpg UK | 5.6L/100 km42mpg US50.4mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.1s Calculated | 15.7s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 124hp/t92kW/t56hp/1000 lb Calculated | 107hp/t79kW/t48hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 258Nm/t172lb-ft/ton Calculated | 218Nm/t146lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 938km583mi Calculated | 1,145km712mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,968cc120cu in | 1,969cc120cu in |
| Length | 4,699mm185in | 4,950mm195in |
| Width | 1,882mm74in | 1,923mm76in |
| Height | 1,685mm66in | 1,776mm70in |
| Wheelbase | 2,789mm110in | 2,984mm117in |
| Front track | 1,579mm62in | 1,673mm66in |
| Rear track | 1,567mm62in | 1,675mm66in |
| Ground clearance | 197mm8in | 238mm9in |
| Trunk volume | 230L | 314L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,950L | 1,886L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 7 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 60L | 71L |
| CO2 emissions | 167g/km | 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.
- Skoda Kodiaq I RS 2.0 BiTDI: Power / Torque
- Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 4,000 rpm | 1,750-2,500 rpm | 4,250 rpm |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 4,000 rpm | 1,740-2,220 rpm | 5,000 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 6.6 s | 7.4 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.0 s | 7.8 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 36.9 s | 43.7 s |
| Top speed | 220 km/h 137 mph | 220 km/h 137 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.4 s | 2.4 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.4 s | 6.6 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.7 s | 10.1 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.6 s | 13.1 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.1 s | 15.7 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 150 km/h 93 mph | 144 km/h 89 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 240 hp 179 kW |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 235 hp 175 kW |
Skoda Kodiaq I RS 2.0 BiTDI has 5 hp more than Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5.
The biggest power difference is between Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5 and Skoda Kodiaq I RS 2.0 BiTDI: 5 hp (4 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 500 Nm 369 lb-ft |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 480 Nm 354 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 1,941 kg 4,279 lb |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 2,205 kg 4,861 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 220 km/h 137 mph |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 220 km/h 137 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 7.0 s |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 7.8 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Skoda Kodiaq I RS 2.0 BiTDI and Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5: 0.8 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 6.4 L/100 km 36.8 mpg US 44.1 mpg UK |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 6.2 L/100 km 37.9 mpg US 45.6 mpg UK |
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 124 hp/t 92 kW/t 8.1 kg/hp |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 107 hp/t 79 kW/t 9.4 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 938 km 583 mi |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 1,145 km 712 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 240 hp 179 kW | 7.0 s | 220 km/h 137 mph |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 235 hp 175 kW | 7.8 s | 220 km/h 137 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI |
| 6.4 L/100 km 36.8 mpg US 44.1 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 |
| 6.2 L/100 km 37.9 mpg US 45.6 mpg UK | ||||||
Skoda Kodiaq I RS 2.0 BiTDI 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 |
|---|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 6.4 L/100 km 36.8 mpg US 44.1 mpg UK | 7.0 s |
| VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | 6.2 L/100 km 37.9 mpg US 45.6 mpg UK | 7.8 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 |
|---|---|---|
| SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | 124 hp/t 92 kW/t 8.1 kg/hp | 6.4 L/100 km 36.8 mpg US 44.1 mpg UK |
| 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 |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | SkodaKodiaq IRS 2.0 BiTDI | VolvoXC90 II2.0 D5 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 240 hp 179 kW | 235 hp 175 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 500 Nm 369 lb-ft | 480 Nm 354 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.0 s | 7.8 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 220 km/h 137 mph | 220 km/h 137 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,941 kg 4,279 lb | 2,205 kg 4,861 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 6.4 L/100 km 36.8 mpg US 44.1 mpg UK | 6.2 L/100 km 37.9 mpg US 45.6 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 938 km 583 mi | 1,145 km 712 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 167 g/km | 162 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 230 L 8.1 cu ft | 314 L 11.1 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 124 hp/t 92 kW/t 8.1 kg/hp | 107 hp/t 79 kW/t 9.4 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 | Skoda Kodiaq I RS 2.0 BiTDI | Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 6.4 L/100 km36.8 mpg US44.1 mpg UK | 6.2 L/100 km37.9 mpg US45.6 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 11.20 LC100 km | 10.85 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 18.02 LC100 mi | 17.46 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 960 L254 US gal211 UK gal | 930 L246 US gal205 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,680 LC/year | 1,628 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Skoda Kodiaq I RS 2.0 BiTDI
- Has 5 hp more
- Has 20 Nm more
- Is 264 kg lighter
- Is 0.8 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 17 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Smallest trunk
- Highest CO2 emissions
Volvo XC90 II 2.0 D5
- Uses 0.2 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 208 km (129 mi) more estimated range
- Has 84 L more trunk volume
- Emits 5 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Heaviest
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























