Toyota Land Cruiser 2012 vs Land Rover Range Rover Sport 2013
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 4.5 Diesel | 3.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 272 HP | 248 HP | |
| Torque: | 650 NM | 600 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 7.6 seconds | |
| Toyota Land Cruiser engine produces 24 HP more power than Land Rover Range Rover Sport, whereas torque is 50 NM more than Land Rover Range Rover Sport. Despite the higher power, Toyota Land Cruiser reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.5 | 7.3 | |
|
The Land Rover Range Rover Sport is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Toyota Land Cruiser consumes 2.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Land Rover Range Rover Sport, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Toyota Land Cruiser could require 330 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 93 litres | 77 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 970 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 1090 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| Land Rover Range Rover Sport gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| 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: | 18 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Lexus LX | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Land Rover Range Rover, Land Rover Discovery | |
| 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 Sport might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Land Rover Range Rover Sport 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: | 4.95 m | 4.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.97 m | 2.07 m | |
| Height: | 1.87 m | 1.78 m | |
| Toyota Land Cruiser is 10 cm longer than the Land Rover Range Rover Sport, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Toyota Land Cruiser is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 259 litres | 784 litres | |
|
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Toyota Land Cruiser has 525 litres less trunk space than the Land Rover Range Rover Sport. 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: | 11.8 meters | 12.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Toyota Land Cruiser is 0.8 metres less than that of the Land Rover Range Rover Sport, which means Toyota Land Cruiser can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 3`350 | 3`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 35 400 | 37 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Toyota Land Cruiser has
|
Land Rover Range Rover Sport has
| |