Volvo XC40
Car comparison
Volvo XC40 2.0 T5vsVolkswagen Touareg III (CR) 2.0 TSI
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolkswagen Touareg III (CR)
2.0 TSI
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Volvo XC40 2.0 T5
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.5 s
- Fastest top speed230 km/h143 mph
- Lightest1,680 kg3,704 lb
- Best power-to-weight147 hp/t110 kW/t6.8 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption7.2 L/100 km32.7 mpg US39.2 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions164 g/km
- Best performance score55/100
- Best economy score87/100
Volkswagen Touareg III (CR) 2.0 TSI
- Most powerful249 hp186 kW
- Highest torque370 Nm273 lb-ft
- Best estimated range915 km568 mi
- Largest trunk810 L
- Best overall score65/100
- Best practicality score92/100
Specification comparison
| Model | VolvoXC402.0 T5 | VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 247hp184kW | 249hp186kW |
| Torque | 350Nm258lb-ft | 370Nm273lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,680kg3,704lb | 1,955kg4,310lb |
| Gross weight | 2,220kg4,894lb | - |
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 225 km/h 140 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 74.4s99% target: 228 km/h / 141 mph Calculated | 82.2s99% target: 223 km/h / 138 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 6.5s | 6.8s |
| 0-200 km/h | 28.7s Calculated | 33.6s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 6.2s Calculated | 6.4s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 7.2L/100 km32.7mpg US39.2mpg UK | 8.2L/100 km28.7mpg US34.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | - | 10L/100 km23.5mpg US28.2mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | - | 7.1L/100 km33.1mpg US39.8mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 14.6s Calculated | 14.9s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 147hp/t110kW/t67hp/1000 lb Calculated | 127hp/t95kW/t58hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 208Nm/t139lb-ft/ton Calculated | 189Nm/t127lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 750km466mi Calculated | 915km568mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,969cc120cu in | 1,984cc121cu in |
| Length | 4,425mm174in | 4,878mm192in |
| Width | 1,863mm73in | 1,984mm78in |
| Height | 1,652mm65in | 1,717mm68in |
| Wheelbase | 2,702mm106in | 2,904mm114in |
| Front track | 1,601mm63in | 1,669mm66in |
| Rear track | 1,626mm64in | 1,685mm66in |
| Ground clearance | 211mm8in | 215mm8in |
| Trunk volume | 460L | 810L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,336L | 1,800L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 54L | 75L |
| CO2 emissions | 164g/km | 188g/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 XC40 2.0 T5: Power / Torque
- Volkswagen Touareg III (CR) 2.0 TSI: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 5,500 rpm | 1,800-4,800 rpm | 5,750 rpm |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 5,000-6,000 rpm | 1,600-4,500 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | VolvoXC402.0 T5 | VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 6.2 s | 6.4 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 6.5 s | 6.8 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 28.7 s | 33.6 s |
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 225 km/h 140 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.4 s | 2.4 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.3 s | 6.4 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.5 s | 9.6 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.3 s | 12.5 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 14.6 s | 14.9 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 157 km/h 97 mph | 152 km/h 94 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 247 hp 184 kW |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 249 hp 186 kW |
Volkswagen Touareg III (CR) 2.0 TSI has 2 hp more than Volvo XC40 2.0 T5.
The biggest power difference is between Volvo XC40 2.0 T5 and Volkswagen Touareg III (CR) 2.0 TSI: 2 hp (1 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 370 Nm 273 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 1,680 kg 3,704 lb |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 1,955 kg 4,310 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 230 km/h 143 mph |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 225 km/h 140 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 6.5 s |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 6.8 s |
Although Volkswagen Touareg III (CR) 2.0 TSI has more power, Volvo XC40 2.0 T5 is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volvo XC40 2.0 T5 and Volkswagen Touareg III (CR) 2.0 TSI: 0.3 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 7.2 L/100 km 32.7 mpg US 39.2 mpg UK |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 8.2 L/100 km 28.7 mpg US 34.4 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volvo XC40 2.0 T5 and Volkswagen Touareg III (CR) 2.0 TSI: 1.0 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 147 hp/t 110 kW/t 6.8 kg/hp |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 127 hp/t 95 kW/t 7.9 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 750 km 466 mi |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 915 km 568 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 247 hp 184 kW | 6.5 s | 230 km/h 143 mph |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 249 hp 186 kW | 6.8 s | 225 km/h 140 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 |
| 7.2 L/100 km 32.7 mpg US 39.2 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI |
| 8.2 L/100 km 28.7 mpg US 34.4 mpg UK | ||||||
Volvo XC40 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 |
|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 7.2 L/100 km 32.7 mpg US 39.2 mpg UK | 6.5 s |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 8.2 L/100 km 28.7 mpg US 34.4 mpg UK | 6.8 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 |
|---|---|---|
| VolvoXC402.0 T5 | 147 hp/t 110 kW/t 6.8 kg/hp | 7.2 L/100 km 32.7 mpg US 39.2 mpg UK |
| VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | 127 hp/t 95 kW/t 7.9 kg/hp | 8.2 L/100 km 28.7 mpg US 34.4 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | VolvoXC402.0 T5 | VolkswagenTouareg III (CR)2.0 TSI | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 247 hp 184 kW | 249 hp 186 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 350 Nm 258 lb-ft | 370 Nm 273 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 6.5 s | 6.8 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 230 km/h 143 mph | 225 km/h 140 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,680 kg 3,704 lb | 1,955 kg 4,310 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 7.2 L/100 km 32.7 mpg US 39.2 mpg UK | 8.2 L/100 km 28.7 mpg US 34.4 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 750 km 466 mi | 915 km 568 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 164 g/km | 188 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 460 L 16.2 cu ft | 810 L 28.6 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 147 hp/t 110 kW/t 6.8 kg/hp | 127 hp/t 95 kW/t 7.9 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 XC40 2.0 T5 | Volkswagen Touareg III (CR) 2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 7.2 L/100 km32.7 mpg US39.2 mpg UK | 8.2 L/100 km28.7 mpg US34.4 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 12.60 LC100 km | 14.35 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 20.28 LC100 mi | 23.09 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,080 L285 US gal238 UK gal | 1,230 L325 US gal271 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,890 LC/year | 2,153 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Volvo XC40 2.0 T5
- Is 275 kg lighter
- Is 0.3 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 5 km/h (3 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 1.0 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 20 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Emits 24 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Lowest power
- Smallest trunk
Volkswagen Touareg III (CR) 2.0 TSI
- Has 2 hp more
- Has 20 Nm more
- Has 165 km (102 mi) more estimated range
- Has 350 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
- Highest CO2 emissions
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























