Jeep Wrangler 2002 vs Land Rover Range Rover 1995
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | 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: | 143 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 17.5 seconds | |
|
Jeep Wrangler is more dynamic to drive. Jeep Wrangler engine produces 7 HP more power than Land Rover Range Rover, but torque is 55 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover. Thanks to more power Jeep Wrangler reaches 100 km/h speed 5.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.4 | 11.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.4 l/100km | 11.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Jeep Wrangler consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover, which means that by driving the Jeep Wrangler over 15,000 km in a year you can save 150 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Jeep Wrangler consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 76 litres | 90 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Chrysler Voyager, Jeep Cherokee, Dodge Grand Caravan | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Jeep Wrangler might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.95 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.82 m | |
|
Jeep Wrangler is smaller. Jeep Wrangler is 76 cm shorter than the Land Rover Range Rover, 21 cm narrower, while the height of Jeep Wrangler is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 320 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1045 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Wrangler is 1.7 metres less than that of the Land Rover Range Rover, which means Jeep Wrangler can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`000 | 3`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 9800 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Wrangler has
|
Land Rover Range Rover has
| |