Land Rover Range Rover Sport 2005 vs Mercedes ML 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.7 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 190 HP | 224 HP | |
| Torque: | 440 NM | 510 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 seconds | 8.6 seconds | |
|
Mercedes ML is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Range Rover Sport engine produces 34 HP less power than Mercedes ML, whereas torque is 70 NM less than Mercedes ML. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Range Rover Sport reaches 100 km/h speed 4.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.2 | 9.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.0 l/100km | 10.7 l/100km | |
|
The Mercedes ML is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover Sport consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover Sport could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover Sport consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 82 litres | 95 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 1020 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1210 km on highway | ||
| 740 km with real consumption | 880 km with real consumption | ||
| Mercedes ML 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) | 210 mm (8.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Land Rover Range Rover Sport can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 21 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Land Rover Discovery | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Mercedes C klase, Mercedes E klase, Mercedes G klase | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mercedes ML might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Mercedes ML 2008 3.0 engine: A reliable yet dynamic engine. Frequent oil leaks, engine crankcase ventilation problems. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.79 m | 4.78 m | |
| Width: | 1.93 m | 1.91 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.82 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Sport is larger, but slightly lower. Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 1 cm longer than the Mercedes ML, 2 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 958 litres | 551 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2013 litres | 2050 litres | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Sport has 407 litres more trunk space than the Mercedes ML. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mercedes ML (by 37 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| Gross weight: | 3`070 kg | 2`830 kg | |
| Net weight: | 2`455 kg | 2`110 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 615 kg | 720 kg | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Sport load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 17 procentiem less than Mercedes ML. Therefore, Mercedes ML is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 7600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has
|
Mercedes ML has
| |