Toyota Land Cruiser 2017 vs Land Rover Range Rover Velar 2017
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.8 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 177 HP | 240 HP | |
| Torque: | 450 NM | 500 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 seconds | 7.3 seconds | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Velar is a more dynamic driving. Toyota Land Cruiser engine produces 63 HP less power than Land Rover Range Rover Velar, whereas torque is 50 NM less than Land Rover Range Rover Velar. Due to the lower power, Toyota Land Cruiser reaches 100 km/h speed 5.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.8 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover Velar is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Toyota Land Cruiser consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Velar, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota Land Cruiser could require 240 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Toyota Land Cruiser consumes 2.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Velar. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 87 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1170 km in combined cycle | 1030 km in combined cycle | |
| 1380 km on highway | 1170 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 840 km with real consumption | ||
| Toyota Land Cruiser 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: | 350'000 km | 300'000 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 | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Toyota Hilux | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Land Rover Defender, Jaguar XF, Land Rover Range Rover Evoque, Jaguar E-Pace | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Land Rover Range Rover Velar might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Toyota Land Cruiser 2017 2.8 engine: The 1GD-FTV diesel engine was introduced by Toyota in 2015 to address the shortcomings of the earlier KD series, such as high noise levels, poor performance, low fuel efficiency, environmental concerns, and ... More about Toyota Land Cruiser 2017 2.8 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.84 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.86 m | 2.03 m | |
| Height: | 1.85 m | 1.67 m | |
| Toyota Land Cruiser is 4 cm longer than the Land Rover Range Rover Velar, 18 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota Land Cruiser is 18 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 621 litres | 673 litres | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Velar has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Toyota Land Cruiser has 52 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Range Rover Velar. This could mean that the Toyota Land Cruiser uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.6 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`990 | 2`510 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 50 200 | 43 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Land Cruiser has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Velar has
| |