Land Rover Range Rover Velar 2017 vs Volvo XC90 2014
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 250 HP | 320 HP | |
| Torque: | 365 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.7 seconds | 6.9 seconds | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Velar engine produces 70 HP less power than Volvo XC90, whereas torque is 35 NM less than Volvo XC90. Despite less power, Land Rover Range Rover Velar reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 7.7 | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Velar consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90, which means that by driving the Land Rover Range Rover Velar over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 71 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 920 km in combined cycle | |
| Volvo XC90 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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: | 251 mm (9.9 inches) | 238 mm (9.4 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Land Rover Range Rover Velar can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 360'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Land Rover Defender, Land Rover Range Rover Sport, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volvo S60, Volvo XC60, Volvo S90, Volvo V90 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volvo XC90 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.95 m | |
| Width: | 2.03 m | 2.01 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.78 m | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Velar is 15 cm shorter than the Volvo XC90, 2 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover Velar is 11 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 673 litres | 615 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1731 litres | 1886 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, The Volvo XC90 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volvo XC90 (by 155 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover Velar is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`470 kg | 2`750 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`804 kg | 2`078 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 666 kg | 672 kg | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volvo XC90 scores higher in safety tests. The Volvo XC90 scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 26 200 | 21 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Velar has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |