Land Rover Range Rover Sport 2009 vs Lexus RX 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.5 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Land Rover Range Rover Sport) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Lexus RX) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 245 HP | 277 HP | |
| Torque: | 600 NM | 346 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 8 seconds | |
|
Lexus RX is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Range Rover Sport engine produces 32 HP less power than Lexus RX, but torque is 254 NM more than Lexus RX. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Range Rover Sport reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.2 | 10.6 | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover Sport is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Range Rover Sport consumes 1.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Lexus RX, which means that by driving the Land Rover Range Rover Sport over 15,000 km in a year you can save 210 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 84 litres | 72 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 22 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Land Rover Range Rover, Land Rover Discovery | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Toyota RAV4, Toyota Camry, Toyota Sienna, Lexus ES | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Lexus RX might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.79 m | 4.77 m | |
| Width: | 2.00 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.73 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Sport is larger. Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 2 cm longer than the Lexus RX, 12 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 958 litres | 446 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2013 litres | 1570 litres | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has more luggage capacity. Land Rover Range Rover Sport has 512 litres more trunk space than the Lexus RX. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Land Rover Range Rover Sport (by 443 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 0.5 metres more than that of the Lexus RX, which means Land Rover Range Rover Sport can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 3`175 kg | 2`545 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 8800 | 15 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has
|
Lexus RX has
| |