Land Rover Range Rover 2010 vs BMW X6 2008
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.4 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 313 HP | 286 HP | |
| Torque: | 700 NM | 580 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.8 seconds | 6.9 seconds | |
| Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 27 HP more power than BMW X6, whereas torque is 120 NM more than BMW X6. Despite the higher power, Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.2 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 1.1 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 165 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X6. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 85 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 1020 km in combined cycle | |
| 1210 km on highway | 1190 km on highway | ||
| 890 km with real consumption | 760 km with real consumption | ||
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 | 12 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 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.97 m | 4.88 m | |
| Width: | no data | 1.98 m | |
| Height: | no data | 1.69 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 570 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1450 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 12.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 2`710 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 15 600 | 15 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
BMW X6 has
| |