Land Rover Range Rover 2012 vs Volvo XC90 2014
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Land Rover Range Rover is available only with four wheel (4x4) drive, while Volvo XC90 can be equipped with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Volvo XC90 also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
| Engines: | 3.0 - 5.0 (petrol, diesel) | 2.0 (petrol, diesel, hybrid) | |
| Both cars are available with petrol and diesel engines. Volvo XC90 is available also with hybrid engines. Hybrid engines offer superior fuel efficiency and reduced emissions compared to conventional engine types. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 258 - 510 HP | 190 - 320 HP | |
| Torque: | 510 - 700 NM | 350 - 480 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 5.4 - 7.9 seconds | 5.6 - 9.4 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 - 13.8 | 2.1 - 8.1 | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover petrol engines consumes on average 5.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than Volvo XC90. On average, Land Rover Range Rover equipped with diesel engines consume 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo XC90. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.00 m | 4.95 m | |
| Width: | 2.05 m | 1.94 m | |
| Height: | 1.84 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is larger. Land Rover Range Rover is 5 cm longer than the Volvo XC90, 11 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 615 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2030 litres | 1886 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Land Rover Range Rover has 65 litres less trunk space than the Volvo XC90. This could mean that the Land Rover Range Rover uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Land Rover Range Rover (by 144 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 0.2 metres less than that of the Volvo XC90. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 3`117 | ~ 2`880 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volvo XC90 scores higher in safety tests. The Volvo XC90 scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 47 800 | 26 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Volvo XC90 has
| |