Land Rover Range Rover Sport 2009 vs Porsche Cayenne 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 245 HP | 240 HP | |
| Torque: | 600 NM | 550 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 8.3 seconds | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Sport engine produces 5 HP more power than Porsche Cayenne, whereas torque is 50 NM more than Porsche Cayenne. Despite the higher power, Land Rover Range Rover Sport reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.2 | 9.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.1 l/100km | 11.3 l/100km | |
|
The Porsche Cayenne is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Land Rover Range Rover Sport consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Porsche Cayenne, which means that by driving the Land Rover Range Rover Sport over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Land Rover Range Rover Sport consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Porsche Cayenne. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 84 litres | 100 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 910 km in combined cycle | 1070 km in combined cycle | |
| 690 km with real consumption | 880 km with real consumption | ||
| Porsche Cayenne 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: | 227 mm (8.9 inches) | 218 mm (8.6 inches) | |
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: | 17 years | 1 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Land Rover Range Rover, Land Rover Discovery | 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 Sport might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.79 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 2.00 m | 1.93 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.70 m | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 1 cm shorter than the Porsche Cayenne, 8 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 958 litres | 540 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2013 litres | 1770 litres | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Porsche Cayenne may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Land Rover Range Rover Sport (by 243 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 Porsche Cayenne, which means Land Rover Range Rover Sport can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight: | 3`175 kg | 3`015 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 8600 | 9800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has
|
Porsche Cayenne has
| |