Land Rover Range Rover 2002 vs Chevrolet Tahoe 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.9 Diesel | 5.3 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 (Chevrolet Tahoe) 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 chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 273 HP | |
| Torque: | 390 NM | 427 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.6 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Chevrolet Tahoe is a more dynamic driving. Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 96 HP less power than Chevrolet Tahoe, whereas torque is 37 NM less than Chevrolet Tahoe. Due to the lower power, Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.3 | 15.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.2 l/100km | 16.0 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover consumes 4.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Tahoe, which means that by driving the Land Rover Range Rover over 15,000 km in a year you can save 615 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover consumes 3.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chevrolet Tahoe. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 98 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 880 km in combined cycle | 630 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 750 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 700'000 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 Chevrolet Tahoe engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Chevrolet Express, Chevrolet Suburban | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chevrolet Tahoe might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.95 m | 5.05 m | |
| Width: | 1.96 m | 2.07 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.84 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is smaller. Land Rover Range Rover is 10 cm shorter than the Chevrolet Tahoe, 11 cm narrower, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 460 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 2920 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 0.1 metres less than that of the Chevrolet Tahoe. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 3`084 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 5600 | 7200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Chevrolet Tahoe has
| |