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 3-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 6-cylinder, 12-valves 177hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 177hp engine designed by Rover.

The fact that the Land Rover got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, isn't really an advantage, taken the poor 3-star rating it received. 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 it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the British car offers a marginal difference of 5% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Jeep does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. That's the official data, 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. Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the American car rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Jeep is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.2 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 174 kilometers per hour, 8km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 12.6 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (23 mpg), in combined cycle.

Land Rover 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 offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. From there things take a different direction, with Jeep being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the 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™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.