Compare Range Rover vs Range Rover Sport L494 vs Volvo XC90 II
Variants
3.0 SDV6 250
3.0 SDV6 250 LWB
3.0 SDV6 275
3.0 SDV6 275 LWB
3.0 SDV6 Hybrid
3.0 Supercharged 340
3.0 Supercharged 340 LWB
3.0 Supercharged 380
3.0 Supercharged 380 LWB
3.0 TDV6
3.0 TDV6 Euro6
3.0 TDV6 Euro6 LWB
4.4 SDV8
4.4 SDV8 Euro6 LWB
4.4 SDV8 Euro6 LWB
4.4 SDV8 Euro6d
4.4 SDV8 Euro6d LWB
5.0
5.0 Euro5
5.0 Supercharged 510 LWB
5.0 Supercharged 525
5.0 Supercharged 525 LWB
5.0 Supercharged SVAutobiography
5.0 Supercharged SVAutobiography LWB
D250
D300
D300 LWB
D350
D350 LWB
P360
P360 LWB
P400
P400 LWB
P400e
P400e LWB
P300
P300 7 seat
SD4
SD4 7 seat
Si4
Si4 7 seat
D250
D250 7 seat
D300
D300 7 seat
D350
P360
P360 7 seat
P400
P400 7 seat
SDV6 Euro6b
SDV6 Euro6
SDV6 Euro6 7 seat
TDV6
SDV6
V6 Supercharged Euro6
V6 Supercharged
V6 Supercharged Euro6 7 seat
SDV8 Euro6
SDV8
V8 Supercharged
V8 Supercharged Euro6
V8 Supercharged Euro6 7 seat
P400e
SVR
SVR Euro6
D4 AT
D4 AWD AT
D5 AWD AT
D5 Euro6d AWD AT
T5 Euro6d AWD AT
T5 AWD AT
T6 Euro6d AWD AT
T6 AWD AT
T8 Euro6d AWD AT
T8 AWD AT
Capacity
Passengers
5
Payload
672 kg / 1482 lbs
Chassis
Offroad | Approach Angle
23.8 deg
Offroad | Breakover Angle
21.3 deg
Offroad | Departure Angle
23.3 deg
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
Double-wishbone
Double-wishbone
Double-wishbone
Suspension | Rear
Multi-link
Multi-link
Multi-link
Tire Size
275/45 R21 110Y, 295/40 R22
Water Fording
900 mm / 35.4 in
450 mm / 17.7 in
Construction
Battery | Capacity
13.0 kWh (gross)
13.1 kWh (gross)
Dimensions
Size | Height
1776 mm / 69.9 in
Size | Length
4950 mm / 194.9 in
Track Width | Rear
1686.0 mm / 66.4 in
Wheel Size
19 in, 20 in, 21 in, 22 in
Wheelbase
2923 mm / 115.1 in
2984 mm / 117.5 in
Performance
Braking | 100 km/h - 0
36.0 m / 118.1 ft
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (longitudinal), All-wheel drive
Engine | Bore
82.0 mm / 3.2 in
Engine | Displacement
2.0 L / 120.2 cu-in / 1969.0 cc
Engine | Stroke
93.2 mm / 3.7 in
Transmission | Gears
8-speed
8-speed
8-speed
Transmission | Type
Automatic
Automatic
Reviews
Neofiliac score
86%
76%
70%
Pros
- Interesting engine choices
- Great comfort
- Superb offroad capabilities
- Low official fuel consumption available
- High cargo capacity
- Good towing capacity
- Powerful engines on option
- Good offroad capabilities
- Good towing capacity
- Some offroad capabilities
- Good 0.28 drag coefficient
- Down to very low official fuel consumption
Cons
- Horribly unreliable, a reputation well earned and well kept
- Serious reliability concerns
- LR's own copy of RR
- Only available with small engines
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.