Land Rover Range Rover Sport 2005 vs Porsche Cayenne 2009
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.7 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 190 HP | 240 HP | |
| Torque: | 440 NM | 550 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 seconds | 8.3 seconds | |
|
Porsche Cayenne is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Range Rover Sport engine produces 50 HP less power than Porsche Cayenne, whereas torque is 110 NM less than Porsche Cayenne. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Range Rover Sport reaches 100 km/h speed 4.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.2 | 9.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.0 l/100km | 11.3 l/100km | |
|
By specification Land Rover Range Rover Sport consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Porsche Cayenne, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover Sport could require 135 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Land Rover Range Rover Sport consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Porsche Cayenne. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 82 litres | 100 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 1070 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1260 km on highway | ||
| 740 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: | 330'000 km | 420'000 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 Porsche Cayenne engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 1 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on 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: | 1.93 m | 1.93 m | |
| Height: | 1.78 m | 1.70 m | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 1 cm shorter than the Porsche Cayenne, width is practically the same , while the height of Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 8 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: | 11.6 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover Sport is 0.2 metres more than that of the Porsche Cayenne. | |||
| Gross weight: | 3`070 kg | 3`015 kg | |
| Net weight: | 2`455 kg | 2`240 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 615 kg | 775 kg | |
| Land Rover Range Rover Sport load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 26 procentiem less than Porsche Cayenne. Therefore, Porsche Cayenne is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | high | |
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has
|
Porsche Cayenne has
| |