Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2015 vs Toyota C-HR 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 240 HP | 116 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 185 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.6 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Range Rover Evoque engine produces 124 HP more power than Toyota C-HR, whereas torque is 155 NM more than Toyota C-HR. Thanks to more power Land Rover Range Rover Evoque reaches 100 km/h speed 3.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.7 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota C-HR is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover Evoque consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota C-HR, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque could require 285 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque consumes 3.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota C-HR. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 68 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 870 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 630 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) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 300'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Land Rover Freelander, Land Rover Discovery Sport, Jaguar XJ, Jaguar XF | 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. Land Rover Range Rover Evoque might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Toyota C-HR 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.37 m | 4.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.99 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.56 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is larger. Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is 1 cm longer than the Toyota C-HR, 19 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is 10 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 575 litres | 377 litres | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has more luggage capacity. Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has 198 litres more trunk space than the Toyota C-HR. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is 0.3 metres more than that of the Toyota C-HR. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`350 | 1`865 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 21 400 | 17 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
|
Toyota C-HR has
| |