Land Rover Range Rover 2010 vs Volkswagen Touareg 2010
Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 4.4 Diesel | 4.1 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 313 HP | 340 HP | |
Torque: | 700 NM | 800 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.8 seconds | 5.8 seconds | |
Volkswagen Touareg is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 27 HP less power than Volkswagen Touareg, whereas torque is 100 NM less than Volkswagen Touareg. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 9.1 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 11.2 l/100km | 10.6 l/100km | |
The Volkswagen Touareg is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Touareg, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover could require 45 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Touareg. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 85 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 1060 km in combined cycle | 930 km in combined cycle | |
1210 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
890 km with real consumption | 800 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) | |
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.97 m | 4.80 m | |
Width: | no data | 1.94 m | |
Height: | no data | 1.71 m | |
Trunk capacity: | no data | 560 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1642 litres | |
Turning diameter: | no data | 11.9 meters | |
Gross weight (kg): | 3`200 | 2`920 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | no data | average | |
Average price (€): | 13 800 | 14 200 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Volkswagen Touareg has
| |