Land Rover Range Rover 2013 vs Dodge Durango 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.4 Diesel | 3.6 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Land Rover Range Rover) 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 (Dodge Durango) 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 | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 339 HP | 294 HP | |
| Torque: | 700 NM | 353 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.9 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 45 HP more power than Dodge Durango, whereas torque is 347 NM more than Dodge Durango. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 11.2 | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Range Rover consumes 2.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Dodge Durango, which means that by driving the Land Rover Range Rover over 15,000 km in a year you can save 375 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 105 litres | 93 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1200 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1380 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 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 | 460'000 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 | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Land Rover Range Rover Sport | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Jeep Grand Cherokee, Chrysler Grand Voyager, Chrysler Town & Country | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Dodge Durango might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Dodge Durango 2013 3.6 engine: The variable valve timing regulators, oil pump, water pump, and thermostat are known for their limited lifespan. Another common issue is the clogging of oil channels with wear particles.
After ... More about Dodge Durango 2013 3.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.00 m | 5.11 m | |
| Width: | 2.07 m | 1.92 m | |
| Height: | 1.84 m | 1.80 m | |
| Land Rover Range Rover is 11 cm shorter than the Dodge Durango, 15 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 490 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 490 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 550 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2030 litres | 2410 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Dodge Durango (by 380 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 12.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 0.2 metres less than that of the Dodge Durango. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 2`948 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 47 600 | 26 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Dodge Durango has
| |