Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the suv segment and utilize the same 5-door suv body style and the 4 x 4 wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Chrysler-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 8-cylinder, 16-valves 260hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 8-cylinder, 32-valves 286hp engine designed by BMW.

The fact that the Land Rover got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, offers a slight advantage, as the 4-star rating is better than none. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the British car offers a considerable difference of 24% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Jeep does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Jeep with an average rating of 4.0, and models under the Land Rover badge with 3.8 out of 5. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the American car rank it on average as 3.0 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.

Jeep is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.9 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 208 kilometers per hour, exactly the same as the other car does. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 16.4 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (17 mpg), in combined cycle.

Jeep appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the British car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. From there things take a different direction, with Jeep offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Land Rover. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.