Land Rover Range Rover 2013 vs BMW X6 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.4 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 339 HP | 286 HP | |
| Torque: | 700 NM | 580 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.9 seconds | 6.9 seconds | |
| Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 53 HP more power than BMW X6, whereas torque is 120 NM more than BMW X6. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.9 l/100km | 11.1 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X6 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X6, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 105 litres | 85 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1200 km in combined cycle | 1020 km in combined cycle | |
| 1380 km on highway | 1190 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 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 Land Rover Range Rover engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Land Rover Range Rover Sport | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW X5, BMW 7 sērija, BMW X3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| BMW X6 2008 3.0 engine: The BMW M57 engine is regarded as one of the best German-built power units. Its inline-six layout is praised for reliability, and cars equipped with this engine are often more desirable on the used market. Despite delivering strong performance, the ... More about BMW X6 2008 3.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.00 m | 4.88 m | |
| Width: | 2.07 m | 1.98 m | |
| Height: | 1.84 m | 1.69 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is larger. Land Rover Range Rover is 12 cm longer than the BMW X6, 9 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 15 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 570 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2030 litres | 1450 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Land Rover Range Rover has 20 litres less trunk space than the BMW X6. This could mean that the Land Rover Range Rover uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Land Rover Range Rover (by 580 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 12.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 0.5 metres less than that of the BMW X6, which means Land Rover Range Rover can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 2`710 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 42 200 | 12 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
BMW X6 has
| |