Land Rover Range Rover 2013 vs Mercedes ML 2011
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.4 Diesel | 4.7 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 (Mercedes ML) 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." | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 339 HP | 408 HP | |
| Torque: | 700 NM | 600 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.9 seconds | 5.6 seconds | |
|
Mercedes ML is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 69 HP less power than Mercedes ML, but torque is 100 NM more than Mercedes ML. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.7 | 11.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.9 l/100km | 13.4 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover consumes 2.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML, which means that by driving the Land Rover Range Rover over 15,000 km in a year you can save 420 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mercedes ML. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 105 litres | 93 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1200 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1380 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 690 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) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 5.00 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 2.07 m | 1.93 m | |
| Height: | 1.84 m | 1.80 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is larger. Land Rover Range Rover is 20 cm longer than the Mercedes ML, 15 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 690 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2030 litres | 2010 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, 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 20 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12.3 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 0.5 metres more than that of the Mercedes ML, which means Land Rover Range Rover can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 3`200 kg | 2`900 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 41 400 | 14 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Mercedes ML has
| |