Car comparison

Subaru Forester IV · Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 TvsVolvo XC60 II 2.0 D5

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

Volvo XC60 II

2.0 D5

235 hp1969 ccDieselAWDAutomaticTwin-turboSUV2017-2018

Comparison overview

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

Best choices

Volvo XC60 II 2.0 D5

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    7.2 s
  • Highest torque
    480 Nm
    354 lb-ft
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    6.0 L/100 km
    39.2 mpg US
    47.1 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    6.8 L/100 km
    34.6 mpg US
    41.5 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    5.5 L/100 km
    42.8 mpg US
    51.4 mpg UK
  • Lowest CO2 emissions
    158 g/km
  • Best estimated range
    1,183 km
    735 mi
  • Best overall score
    64/100
  • Best performance score
    54/100
  • Best economy score
    91/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelSubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TVolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
Power
240hp179kW
235hp175kW
Torque
350Nm258lb-ft
480Nm354lb-ft
Curb weight
1,624kg3,580lb
1,976kg4,356lb
Gross weight
2,110kg4,652lb
2,470kg5,445lb
Top speed
221 km/h
137 mph
220 km/h
137 mph
To 99% top speed
79.3s99% target: 219 km/h / 136 mph
Calculated
81.6s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
7.5s
7.2s
0-200 km/h
36.4s
Calculated
37.4s
Calculated
0-60 mph
7.1s
Calculated
6.8s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
8.5L/100 km27.7mpg US33.2mpg UK
6L/100 km39.2mpg US47.1mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
11.2L/100 km21mpg US25.2mpg UK
6.8L/100 km34.6mpg US41.5mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
7L/100 km33.6mpg US40.4mpg UK
5.5L/100 km42.8mpg US51.4mpg UK
Quarter mile
15.4s
Calculated
15.2s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
148hp/t110kW/t67hp/1000 lb
Calculated
119hp/t89kW/t54hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
216Nm/t144lb-ft/ton
Calculated
243Nm/t163lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
706km439mi
Calculated
1,183km735mi
Calculated
Displacement
1,998cc122cu in
1,969cc120cu in
Length
4,595mm181in
4,688mm185in
Width
1,795mm71in
1,902mm75in
Height
1,735mm68in
1,658mm65in
Wheelbase
2,640mm104in
2,865mm113in
Front track
1,545mm61in
1,668mm66in
Rear track
1,555mm61in
1,673mm66in
Ground clearance
220mm9in
216mm9in
Trunk volume
505L
505L
Max trunk volume
1,557L
1,432L
Doors
5
5
Seats
5
5
Fuel tank
60L
71L
CO2 emissions
197g/km
158g/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 TVolvo XC60 II 2.0 D5PowerTorque
  • Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T: Power / Torque
  • Volvo XC60 II 2.0 D5: 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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D54,000 rpm1,750-2,250 rpm4,250 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricSubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TVolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
7.1 s
6.8 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
7.5 s
7.2 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
36.4 s
37.4 s
Top speed
221 km/h
137 mph
220 km/h
137 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
15.2 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
149 km/h
93 mph
149 km/h
93 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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
235 hp
175 kW

Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T has 5 hp more than Volvo XC60 II 2.0 D5.

The biggest power difference is between Volvo XC60 II 2.0 D5 and Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T: 5 hp (4 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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
480 Nm
354 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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
1,976 kg
4,356 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
VolvoXC60 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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T7.5 s
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D57.2 s

Although Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T has more power, Volvo XC60 II 2.0 D5 is quicker from 0-100 km/h.

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo XC60 II 2.0 D5 and Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T: 0.3 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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
6.0 L/100 km
39.2 mpg US
47.1 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volvo XC60 II 2.0 D5 and Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T: 2.5 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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
119 hp/t
89 kW/t
8.4 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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
1,183 km
735 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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
235 hp
175 kW
7.2 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.

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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
Power
235 hp
175 kW
0-100 km/h7.2 s
Top speed
220 km/h
137 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
505 L
17.8 cu ft
Length
4,688 mm
184.6 in
Height
1,658 mm
65.3 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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
Power
235 hp
175 kW
0-100 km/h7.2 s
Top speed
220 km/h
137 mph
6.0 L/100 km
39.2 mpg US
47.1 mpg UK

Volvo XC60 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.

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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
6.0 L/100 km
39.2 mpg US
47.1 mpg UK
7.2 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
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
119 hp/t
89 kW/t
8.4 kg/hp
6.0 L/100 km
39.2 mpg US
47.1 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleSubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TVolvoXC60 II2.0 D5
Power
240 hp
179 kW
235 hp
175 kW
Torque
350 Nm
258 lb-ft
480 Nm
354 lb-ft
Acceleration
7.5 s
7.2 s
Top speed
221 km/h
137 mph
220 km/h
137 mph
Lightness
1,624 kg
3,580 lb
1,976 kg
4,356 lb
Fuel consumption
8.5 L/100 km
27.7 mpg US
33.2 mpg UK
6.0 L/100 km
39.2 mpg US
47.1 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
505 L
17.8 cu ft
Length
4,688 mm
184.6 in
Height
1,658 mm
65.3 in
Range score
706 km
439 mi
1,183 km
735 mi
CO2 score
197 g/km
158 g/km
Trunk score
505 L
17.8 cu ft
505 L
17.8 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
148 hp/t
110 kW/t
6.8 kg/hp
119 hp/t
89 kW/t
8.4 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

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleSubaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 TVolvo XC60 II 2.0 D5
Consumption8.5 L/100 km27.7 mpg US33.2 mpg UK6 L/100 km39.2 mpg US47.1 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km14.88 LC100 km10.50 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi23.94 LC100 mi16.90 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,275 L337 US gal280 UK gal900 L238 US gal198 UK gal
Annual fuel cost2,231 LC/year1,575 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T

  • Has 5 hp more
  • Is 352 kg lighter
  • Has 1 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
  • Has 29 hp/t better power-to-weight

Pros

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

Cons

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

Volvo XC60 II 2.0 D5

  • Has 130 Nm more
  • Is 0.3 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Uses 2.5 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 477 km (297 mi) more estimated range
  • Emits 39 g/km less CO2

Pros

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

Cons

  • Lowest power
  • Heaviest
  • Lowest top speed

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Subaru Forester IV Sport 2.0 T
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 D5
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

Sport 2.0 T
2.0
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsSubaruForester IV2.0
2.0 D5
2.0 D5
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5vsVolvoXC90 II2.0 D5
Sport 2.0 T
2.5 Turbo
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsSubaruForester IIIFacelift 20102.5 Turbo
2.0 D5
2.0 T5
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5vsVolvoXC402.0 T5
Sport 2.0 T
2.5 XT
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsSubaruForester III2.5 XT
2.0 D5
2.0d
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5vsJaguarF-Pace2.0d
Sport 2.0 T
2.5 i 16V Turbo
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsSubaruForester II2.5 i 16V Turbo
2.0 D5
2.0
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5vsPorscheMacan I (95B)2.0
2.0 D5
JCW 2.0
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5vsMiniCountryman (F60)JCW 2.0
Sport 2.0 T
2.0 BiTDI
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsVolkswagenTiguan II2.0 BiTDI
2.0 D5
2.0 D240
VS
VolvoXC60 II2.0 D5vsJaguarE-Pace2.0 D240
Sport 2.0 T
2.0 EcoBoost
VS
SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 TvsFordKuga IIFacelift 20162.0 EcoBoost
Subaru Forester IV · Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T vs Volvo XC60 II 2.0 D5 - car comparison - FastVsFaster