Land Rover Range Rover Sport 2005 vs Volvo XC90 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.4 Petrol | 4.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 300 HP | 315 HP | |
| Torque: | 425 NM | 440 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 7.3 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC90 is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Range Rover Sport engine produces 15 HP less power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 15 NM less than Volvo XC90. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Range Rover Sport reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 14.9 | 13.5 | |
|
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Range Rover Sport consumes 1.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover Sport could require 210 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 86 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 570 km in combined cycle | 590 km in combined cycle | |
| 710 km on highway | 810 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 227 mm (8.9 inches) | 218 mm (8.6 inches) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 700'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volvo XC90 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Land Rover Range Rover, Land Rover Discovery | Used also on Volvo S80 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Land Rover Range Rover Sport might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.79 m | 4.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.93 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.78 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 2 cm shorter than the Volvo XC90, 3 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 958 litres | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 249 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 958 litres | 613 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2013 litres | 1837 litres | |
| In 5-seat version Land Rover Range Rover Sport has more luggage space (by 345 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Land Rover Range Rover Sport (by 176 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 0.9 metres less than that of the Volvo XC90, which means Land Rover Range Rover Sport can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 3`070 kg | 2`770 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 5200 | 7400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |