Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2011 vs BMW X3 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 190 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 420 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Range Rover Evoque engine produces 13 HP more power than BMW X3, whereas torque is 70 NM more than BMW X3. Thanks to more power Land Rover Range Rover Evoque reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.8 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X3 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Land Rover Range Rover Evoque consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3, which means that by driving the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 920 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 1150 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Land Rover Range Rover Evoque engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 17 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Land Rover Freelander, Jaguar XF | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X1 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.36 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.67 m | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is 22 cm shorter than the BMW X3, 5 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is 7 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 480 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1560 litres | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has 70 litres more trunk space than the BMW X3. The BMW X3 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is 0.7 metres less than that of the BMW X3, which means Land Rover Range Rover Evoque can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`350 | 2`265 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 15 800 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
|
BMW X3 has
| |