Suzuki Vitara 1991 vs Land Rover Range Rover 1994
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 4.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 97 HP | 226 HP | |
| Torque: | 132 NM | 377 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover is a more dynamic driving. Suzuki Vitara engine produces 129 HP less power than Land Rover Range Rover, whereas torque is 245 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover. Due to the lower power, Suzuki Vitara reaches 100 km/h speed 4.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 16.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.2 l/100km | 18.1 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Vitara is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki Vitara consumes 7.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover, which means that by driving the Suzuki Vitara over 15,000 km in a year you can save 1170 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki Vitara consumes 8.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 100 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 610 km in combined cycle | |
| 760 km on highway | 800 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 550 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Baleno | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Suzuki Vitara might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| 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: | 4.03 m | 4.71 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.70 m | 1.82 m | |
|
Suzuki Vitara is smaller. Suzuki Vitara is 68 cm shorter than the Land Rover Range Rover, 25 cm narrower, while the height of Suzuki Vitara is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 580 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Vitara is 1.1 metres less than that of the Land Rover Range Rover, which means Suzuki Vitara can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`650 | 3`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Vitara has
|
Land Rover Range Rover has
| |