Land Rover Range Rover 2010 vs BMW X5 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.4 Diesel | 4.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 313 HP | 408 HP | |
| Torque: | 700 NM | 600 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.8 seconds | 5.5 seconds | |
|
BMW X5 is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 95 HP less power than BMW X5, but torque is 100 NM more than BMW X5. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 12.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.2 l/100km | 14.1 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover consumes 3.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X5, which means that by driving the Land Rover Range Rover over 15,000 km in a year you can save 465 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover consumes 2.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X5. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 85 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 680 km in combined cycle | |
| 1210 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 890 km with real consumption | 600 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 350'000 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 | 17 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Land Rover Range Rover Sport | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 7 sērija, BMW X6, BMW 6 sērija | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X5 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.97 m | 4.86 m | |
| Width: | no data | 1.93 m | |
| Height: | no data | 1.78 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 620 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1750 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 12.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 2`870 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 13 800 | 14 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
BMW X5 has
| |