BMW X5 2001 vs Land Rover Range Rover 1995
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.9 Diesel | 2.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 184 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 410 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 seconds | 17.5 seconds | |
|
BMW X5 is more dynamic to drive. BMW X5 engine produces 48 HP more power than Land Rover Range Rover, whereas torque is 140 NM more than Land Rover Range Rover. Thanks to more power BMW X5 reaches 100 km/h speed 7.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.6 | 11.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.9 l/100km | 11.9 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW X5 consumes 1.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover, which means that by driving the BMW X5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 270 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW X5 consumes 2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 93 litres | 90 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 960 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 1140 km on highway | 930 km on highway | ||
| 930 km with real consumption | 750 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW X5 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 | 420'000 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 BMW X5 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 7 sērija | 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. BMW X5 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.67 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.82 m | |
|
BMW X5 is smaller. BMW X5 is 4 cm shorter than the Land Rover Range Rover, 2 cm narrower, while the height of BMW X5 is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 465 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1550 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW X5 is 0.1 metres more than that of the Land Rover Range Rover. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`685 | 3`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4400 | 3600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 8.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW X5 has
|
Land Rover Range Rover has
| |