Jeep Wrangler 2007 vs Land Rover Range Rover Sport 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 245 HP | |
| Torque: | 410 NM | 600 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 9.3 seconds | |
| Jeep Wrangler engine produces 68 HP less power than Land Rover Range Rover Sport, whereas torque is 190 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover Sport. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 9.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.8 l/100km | 12.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification Jeep Wrangler consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Sport, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Jeep Wrangler could require 105 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Jeep Wrangler consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Sport. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 79 litres | 84 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 910 km in combined cycle | |
| 660 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover Sport gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 253 mm (10 inches) | 227 mm (8.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Jeep Wrangler can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 17 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Jeep Cherokee, Dodge Nitro | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Land Rover Range Rover, Land Rover Discovery | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Land Rover Range Rover Sport might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.75 m | 4.79 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 2.00 m | |
| Height: | 1.80 m | 1.78 m | |
|
Jeep Wrangler is smaller, but slightly higher. Jeep Wrangler is 4 cm shorter than the Land Rover Range Rover Sport, 12 cm narrower, while the height of Jeep Wrangler is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 958 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2322 litres | 2013 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 12.25 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Jeep Wrangler is 0.35 metres more than that of the Land Rover Range Rover Sport. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`505 kg | 3`175 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 18 600 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Jeep Wrangler has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has
| |