Chevrolet Equinox 2005 vs Land Rover Range Rover Sport 2005
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) / All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Chevrolet Equinox is available with front wheel drive and four wheel (4x4) drive, while Land Rover Range Rover Sport can be equipped only with four wheel (4x4) drive. All-wheel drive models tend to consume more fuel, so if you don't need off road capabilities, Chevrolet Equinox also offers 2-wheel drive versions for fuel economy. 2WD versions also have lower maintenance costs. | |||
Engines: | 3.4 - 3.6 (petrol) | 2.7 - 4.4 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 185 - 264 HP | 190 - 390 HP | |
Torque: | 285 - 339 NM | 425 - 640 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9 seconds | 7.6 - 12.7 seconds | |
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.0 - 11.0 | 10.2 - 15.9 | |
Chevrolet Equinox petrol engines consumes on average 4.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than Land Rover Range Rover Sport. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.80 m | 4.79 m | |
Width: | 1.81 m | 1.93 m | |
Height: | 1.76 m | 1.78 m | |
Chevrolet Equinox and Land Rover Range Rover Sport are practically the same length. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 860 litres | 960 litres | |
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has more luggage space. Chevrolet Equinox has 100 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Range Rover Sport. | |||
Turning diameter: | no data | 11.6 meters | |
Gross weight (kg): | no data | ~ 3`500 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | no data | no data | |
Average price (€): | no data | 5800 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Chevrolet Equinox has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has
| |