Land Rover Range Rover 1994 vs Jeep Wrangler 1987
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.6 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 226 HP | 121 HP | |
| Torque: | 377 NM | 189 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 14.8 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 105 HP more power than Jeep Wrangler, whereas torque is 188 NM more than Jeep Wrangler. Thanks to more power Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 4.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 16.2 | 13.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 18.1 l/100km | 14.6 l/100km | |
|
The Jeep Wrangler is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Land Rover Range Rover consumes 2.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Wrangler, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Land Rover Range Rover could require 420 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Land Rover Range Rover consumes 3.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Jeep Wrangler. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 76 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 560 km in combined cycle | |
| 550 km with real consumption | 520 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: | 250'000 km | 460'000 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 Jeep Wrangler engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 19 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Jeep Wrangler might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.71 m | 3.88 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.83 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is larger, but slightly lower. Land Rover Range Rover is 83 cm longer than the Jeep Wrangler, 21 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 354 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1223 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 1.9 metres more than that of the Jeep Wrangler, which means Land Rover Range Rover can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 3`500 kg | 1`950 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
Jeep Wrangler has
| |