Land Rover Range Rover 2002 vs Nissan Terrano 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.9 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 154 HP | |
| Torque: | 390 NM | 304 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.6 seconds | 13.5 seconds | |
| Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 23 HP more power than Nissan Terrano, whereas torque is 86 NM more than Nissan Terrano. Despite the higher power, Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 11.3 | 9.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 12.2 l/100km | 9.6 l/100km | |
|
The Nissan Terrano is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover consumes 2.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Terrano, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover could require 330 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover consumes 2.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Terrano. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 80 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 880 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| 1060 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| 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 | 350'000 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: | 4 years | 27 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Used also on Nissan Patrol | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Terrano might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Land Rover Range Rover engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.95 m | 4.73 m | |
| Width: | 1.96 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.81 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is larger. Land Rover Range Rover is 22 cm longer than the Nissan Terrano, 20 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 115 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1900 litres | |
| 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 Nissan Terrano. | |||
| Gross weight: | 3`500 kg | 3`000 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4600 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Nissan Terrano has
| |