Subaru Forester IV · Facelift 2016
Car comparison
Subaru Forester IV · Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 TvsVolvo XC60 II 2.0 T5
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolvo XC60 II
2.0 T5
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.9 s
- Most powerful250 hp186 kW
- Lowest combined fuel consumption7.4 L/100 km31.8 mpg US38.2 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption9.5 L/100 km24.8 mpg US29.7 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption6.2 L/100 km37.9 mpg US45.6 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions171 g/km
- Best estimated range811 km504 mi
- Best performance score53/100
- Best economy score87/100
Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T
- Fastest top speed221 km/h137 mph
- Highest torque350 Nm258 lb-ft
- Lightest1,624 kg3,580 lb
- Best power-to-weight148 hp/t110 kW/t6.8 kg/hp
- Largest trunk505 L
- Best overall score63/100
- Best practicality score85/100
Specification comparison
| Model | SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 240hp179kW | 250hp186kW |
| Torque | 350Nm258lb-ft | 350Nm258lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,624kg3,580lb | 1,852kg4,083lb |
| Gross weight | 2,110kg4,652lb | 2,370kg5,225lb |
| Top speed | 221 km/h 137 mph | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph Calculated |
| To 99% top speed | 79.1s99% target: 219 km/h / 136 mph Calculated | 74.8s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 7.5s | 6.9s |
| 0-200 km/h | 36.4s Calculated | 34.7s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.1s Calculated | 6.5s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 8.5L/100 km27.7mpg US33.2mpg UK | 7.4L/100 km31.8mpg US38.2mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 11.2L/100 km21mpg US25.2mpg UK | 9.5L/100 km24.8mpg US29.7mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 7L/100 km33.6mpg US40.4mpg UK | 6.2L/100 km37.9mpg US45.6mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 15.4s Calculated | 15.0s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 148hp/t110kW/t67hp/1000 lb Calculated | 135hp/t101kW/t61hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 216Nm/t144lb-ft/ton Calculated | 189Nm/t126lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 706km439mi Calculated | 811km504mi 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 | 60L |
| CO2 emissions | 197g/km | 171g/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 T: Power / Torque
- Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | 5,600 rpm | 2,400-3,600 rpm | 5,850 rpm |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 5,500 rpm | 1,800-4,800 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.1 s | 6.5 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 7.5 s | 6.9 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 36.4 s | 34.7 s |
| Top speed | 221 km/h 137 mph | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph Likely limited |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.5 s | 2.4 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.7 s | 6.4 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.1 s | 9.7 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.0 s | 12.6 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 15.4 s | 15.0 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 149 km/h 93 mph | 152 km/h 94 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | 240 hp 179 kW |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 250 hp 186 kW |
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5 has 10 hp more than Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T.
The biggest power difference is between Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T and Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5: 10 hp (7 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | 1,624 kg 3,580 lb |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 1,852 kg 4,083 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | 221 km/h 137 mph |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | 7.5 s |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 6.9 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5 and Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T: 0.6 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | 8.5 L/100 km 27.7 mpg US 33.2 mpg UK |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 7.4 L/100 km 31.8 mpg US 38.2 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5 and Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T: 1.1 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | 148 hp/t 110 kW/t 6.8 kg/hp |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 135 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | 706 km 439 mi |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 811 km 504 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | 240 hp 179 kW | 7.5 s | 221 km/h 137 mph |
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | 250 hp 186 kW | 6.9 s | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T |
| 8.5 L/100 km 27.7 mpg US 33.2 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 |
| 7.4 L/100 km 31.8 mpg US 38.2 mpg UK | ||||||
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 T5 | 7.4 L/100 km 31.8 mpg US 38.2 mpg UK | 6.9 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 T5 | 135 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp | 7.4 L/100 km 31.8 mpg US 38.2 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | SubaruForester IVFacelift 2016Sport 2.0 T | VolvoXC60 II2.0 T5 | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 240 hp 179 kW | 250 hp 186 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 7.5 s | 6.9 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 221 km/h 137 mph | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,624 kg 3,580 lb | 1,852 kg 4,083 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 8.5 L/100 km 27.7 mpg US 33.2 mpg UK | 7.4 L/100 km 31.8 mpg US 38.2 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 706 km 439 mi | 811 km 504 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 197 g/km | 171 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 | 135 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 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 | Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T | Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5 |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 8.5 L/100 km27.7 mpg US33.2 mpg UK | 7.4 L/100 km31.8 mpg US38.2 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 14.88 LC100 km | 12.95 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 23.94 LC100 mi | 20.84 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,275 L337 US gal280 UK gal | 1,110 L293 US gal244 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,231 LC/year | 1,943 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Subaru Forester IV Facelift 2016 Sport 2.0 T
- Is 228 kg lighter
- Has 1 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
- Has 13 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Highest CO2 emissions
Volvo XC60 II 2.0 T5
- Has 10 hp more
- Is 0.6 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Uses 1.1 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 105 km (65 mi) more estimated range
- Emits 26 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Most powerful
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























