Toyota C-HR 2016 vs Land Rover Range Rover Evoque 2015
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 116 HP | 240 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 7.6 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque is a more dynamic driving. Toyota C-HR engine produces 124 HP less power than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, whereas torque is 155 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. Due to the lower power, Toyota C-HR reaches 100 km/h speed 3.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 7.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 l/100km | 10.7 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota C-HR is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota C-HR consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, which means that by driving the Toyota C-HR over 15,000 km in a year you can save 285 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota C-HR consumes 3.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 68 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 1060 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 630 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: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 300'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Land Rover Freelander, Land Rover Discovery Sport, Jaguar XJ, Jaguar XF | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Toyota C-HR 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: | 4.36 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.99 m | |
| Height: | 1.56 m | 1.66 m | |
|
Toyota C-HR is smaller. Toyota C-HR is 1 cm shorter than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, 19 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota C-HR is 10 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 377 litres | 575 litres | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has more luggage space. Toyota C-HR has 198 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota C-HR is 0.3 metres less than that of the Land Rover Range Rover Evoque. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`865 | 2`350 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 17 200 | 20 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota C-HR has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Evoque has
| |