Jeep Compass 2017 vs Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2018
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
| Jeep Compass engine produces 10 HP less power than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, whereas torque is 30 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. Despite less power, Jeep Compass reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.7 | 5.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Jeep Compass is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Jeep Compass consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Compass could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Jeep Compass consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1050 km in combined cycle | 1160 km in combined cycle | |
| 1170 km on highway | 1270 km on highway | ||
| 820 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover Evoque gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | 4x4 - AWD (all-wheel-drive) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2018 2.0 engine: This engine is known for its relatively limited lifespan. In early production models, balance shaft bearings wore out quickly and started making noise. The chain-driven timing system, located on the flywheel ... More about Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2018 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.39 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.65 m | |
| Jeep Compass is 2 cm longer than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, 9 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 458 litres | 591 litres | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Jeep Compass has 133 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. This could mean that the Jeep Compass uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Compass is 0.5 metres less than that of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, which means Jeep Compass can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 2`490 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Land Rover Range Rover Evoque scores higher in safety tests. The Land Rover Range Rover Evoque scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 25 400 | 34 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Compass has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
| |