Land Rover Range Rover 1998 vs Toyota Land Cruiser 1990
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.0 Petrol | 4.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 185 HP | 156 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 298 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 29 HP more power than Toyota Land Cruiser, whereas torque is 42 NM more than Toyota Land Cruiser. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 15.3 | 15.6 | |
| Land Rover Range Rover consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Land Cruiser, which means that by driving the Land Rover Range Rover over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 95 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 730 km on highway | ||
| 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: | 4.71 m | 4.78 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.87 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is smaller. Land Rover Range Rover is 7 cm shorter than the Toyota Land Cruiser, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 830 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1370 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 0.1 metres less than that of the Toyota Land Cruiser. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 2`960 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 12 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
| |