Land Rover Defender 2002 vs BMW X3 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Double-row timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 122 HP | 204 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 410 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 17.5 seconds | 8.2 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Defender engine produces 82 HP less power than BMW X3, whereas torque is 110 NM less than BMW X3. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Defender reaches 100 km/h speed 9.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.8 | 9.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.8 l/100km | 9.8 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Defender consumes 1.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Defender could require 255 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Defender consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 75 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 910 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 480'000 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 Defender engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Land Rover Discovery | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW X5 | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The BMW X3 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| BMW X3 2004 3.0 engine: The BMW M57 engine is regarded as one of the best German-built power units. Its inline-six layout is praised for reliability, and cars equipped with this engine are often more desirable on the used market. Despite delivering ... More about BMW X3 2004 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.60 m | 4.56 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 2.08 m | 1.67 m | |
| Land Rover Defender is 4 cm longer than the BMW X3, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Land Rover Defender is 41 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 480 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1560 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 12.8 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Defender is 0.8 metres more than that of the BMW X3, which means Land Rover Defender can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 3`500 kg | 2`355 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 20 800 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Defender has
|
BMW X3 has
| |