Land Rover Range Rover Sport 2013 vs BMW X5 2013
Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 5.0 Petrol | 4.4 Petrol | |
Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 510 HP | 450 HP | |
Torque: | 625 NM | 650 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 5.3 seconds | 5 seconds | |
BMW X5 is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Range Rover Sport engine produces 60 HP more power than BMW X5, but torque is 25 NM less than BMW X5. Despite the higher power, Land Rover Range Rover Sport reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 12.8 | 10.4 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 16.3 l/100km | 12.8 l/100km | |
The BMW X5 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover Sport consumes 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X5, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover Sport could require 360 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover Sport consumes 3.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X5. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 77 litres | 85 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 600 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
790 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
470 km with real consumption | 660 km with real consumption | ||
BMW X5 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 300'000 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 Range Rover Sport engine could be longer. | |||
Engine production duration: | 15 years | 16 years | |
Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Land Rover Range Rover, Jaguar XJ | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 7 sērija, BMW X6, BMW 6 sērija | |
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X5 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
The BMW X5 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: | 4.85 m | 4.87 m | |
Width: | 2.07 m | 1.94 m | |
Height: | 1.78 m | 1.76 m | |
Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 2 cm shorter than the BMW X5, 14 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 2 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 784 litres | 650 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1870 litres | |
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Land Rover Range Rover Sport has 134 litres more trunk space than the BMW X5. The BMW X5 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
Turning diameter: | 12.1 meters | 12.7 meters | |
The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 0.6 metres less than that of the BMW X5, which means Land Rover Range Rover Sport can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 3`050 | 2`885 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | no data | below average | |
Average price (€): | 39 600 | 29 200 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has
|
BMW X5 has
| |