Land Rover Range Rover 2005 vs Toyota Land Cruiser 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.4 Petrol | 3.0 Diesel | |
| 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: | 306 HP | 173 HP | |
| Torque: | 425 NM | 410 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 11.2 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 133 HP more power than Toyota Land Cruiser, whereas torque is 15 NM more than Toyota Land Cruiser. Thanks to more power Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 14.9 | 9.0 | |
|
The Toyota Land Cruiser is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Range Rover consumes 5.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Land Cruiser, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover could require 885 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 87 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
| Toyota Land Cruiser 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 | 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: | 5 years | 25 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Land Rover Discovery, Land Rover Range Rover Sport | Used also on Toyota Hilux | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Toyota Land Cruiser 2006 3.0 engine: The engine tends to be noisy and vibrate.
Nozzle life is limited when using poor quality fuel.
Increased oil consumption tends to occur over time. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.95 m | 4.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.96 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.90 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is larger, but lower. Land Rover Range Rover is 10 cm longer than the Toyota Land Cruiser, 8 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 535 litres | 620 litres | |
|
Toyota Land Cruiser has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Land Rover Range Rover has 85 litres less trunk space than the Toyota Land Cruiser. 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. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 0.2 metres more than that of the Toyota Land Cruiser. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 2`800 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 7400 | 8400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Toyota Land Cruiser has
| |