Land Rover Range Rover 1998 vs Toyota Land Cruiser 1992
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.6 Petrol | 4.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 218 HP | 215 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 373 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 12.6 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is more dynamic to drive. Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 3 HP more power than Toyota Land Cruiser, whereas torque is 27 NM more than Toyota Land Cruiser. Thanks to more power Land Rover Range Rover reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 16.5 | 17.8 | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Range Rover consumes 1.3 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 195 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 100 litres | 95 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 600 km in combined cycle | 530 km in combined cycle | |
| 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) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 250'000 km | 560'000 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 Toyota Land Cruiser engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 17 years | |
| 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 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: | 4.71 m | 4.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.89 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.82 m | 1.85 m | |
| Land Rover Range Rover is 11 cm shorter than the Toyota Land Cruiser, 7 cm wider, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 3 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
|
Toyota Land Cruiser has
| |