Land Rover Range Rover 1989 vs Toyota Land Cruiser 1985
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Diesel | 4.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 121 HP | 103 HP | |
| Torque: | 284 NM | 241 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 19.5 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Land Rover Range Rover engine produces 18 HP more power than Toyota Land Cruiser, whereas torque is 43 NM more than Toyota Land Cruiser. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 10.3 | 12.9 | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Land Rover Range Rover consumes 2.6 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 390 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 80 litres | 90 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 690 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) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.48 m | 4.75 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.81 m | 1.84 m | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is smaller. Land Rover Range Rover is 27 cm shorter than the Toyota Land Cruiser, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Land Rover Range Rover is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 13.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Land Rover Range Rover is 1.5 metres less than that of the Toyota Land Cruiser, which means Land Rover Range Rover can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`500 | 3`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 9800 | 9600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Land Rover Range Rover has
|
| |