Dodge Durango 2004 vs Land Rover Range Rover 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 5.7 Petrol | 2.9 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 349 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 509 NM | 390 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 13.6 seconds | |
| Dodge Durango engine produces 172 HP more power than Land Rover Range Rover, whereas torque is 119 NM more than Land Rover Range Rover. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 14.6 | 11.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 14.0 l/100km | 12.2 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Dodge Durango consumes 3.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Dodge Durango could require 495 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Dodge Durango consumes 1.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.10 m | 4.95 m | |
| Width: | 1.93 m | 1.96 m | |
| Height: | 1.89 m | 1.82 m | |
| Dodge Durango is 15 cm longer than the Land Rover Range Rover, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Dodge Durango is 7 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 532 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 11.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`995 | 3`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 6400 | 5800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Dodge Durango has
|
Land Rover Range Rover has
| |