Volvo XC90 2002 vs Land Rover Discovery 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Double-row timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 163 HP | 137 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 300 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 15.3 seconds | |
|
Volvo XC90 is more dynamic to drive. Volvo XC90 engine produces 26 HP more power than Land Rover Discovery, whereas torque is 40 NM more than Land Rover Discovery. Thanks to more power Volvo XC90 reaches 100 km/h speed 3.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.1 | 9.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.3 l/100km | 9.8 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo XC90 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo XC90 consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Discovery, which means that by driving the Volvo XC90 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo XC90 consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Discovery. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 93 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 930 km on highway | 1130 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 940 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Discovery gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | 4x4 - Full time 4WD | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 560'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo XC70, Volvo C30 | Used also on Land Rover Defender | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volvo XC90 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Volvo XC90 2002 2.4 engine: These diesel engines are frequently affected by intake manifold swirl flap seizures. This issue often leads to airflow disruptions and rough engine operation.
The actuator for the turbocharger, which relies ... More about Volvo XC90 2002 2.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.80 m | 4.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.90 m | |
|
Volvo XC90 is larger, but lower. Volvo XC90 is 10 cm longer than the Land Rover Discovery, 2 cm wider, while the height of Volvo XC90 is 16 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 249 litres | 1290 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2404 litres | 1970 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Volvo XC90 has 1041 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Discovery. This could mean that the Volvo XC90 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 Volvo XC90 (by 434 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.7 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volvo XC90 is 0.8 metres more than that of the Land Rover Discovery, which means Volvo XC90 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`735 | 2`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4200 | 5400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo XC90 has
|
Land Rover Discovery has
| |