Land Rover Range Rover 2006 vs Chrysler Pacifica 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.6 Diesel | 4.0 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 (Chrysler Pacifica) 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 belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 272 HP | 257 HP | |
| Torque: | 640 NM | 355 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 15 HP more power than Chrysler Pacifica, whereas torque is 285 NM more than Chrysler Pacifica. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | no data | 12.3 | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 87 litres | |
| 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) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 460'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Land Rover Range Rover Sport | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Chrysler Town & Country, Dodge Caravan, Volkswagen Routan | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chrysler Pacifica might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.95 m | 5.05 m | |
| Width: | 1.96 m | 2.01 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.74 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is smaller, but higher. Land Rover Range Rover is 10 cm shorter than the Chrysler Pacifica, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 535 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 370 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 535 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2250 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 12.1 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 0.5 metres less than that of the Chrysler Pacifica, which means Land Rover Range Rover can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 6800 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Chrysler Pacifica has
| |