Compare two cars

Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion

Car #1
Make
Model
Variant
Engine
Car #2
Make
Model
Variant
Engine

compare selected cars
2005. - 2009.
J - SUV
suv, 5 door
4 x 4
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
2005. - 2010.
J - SUV
suv, 5 door
4 x 4

Marketing

!function(v,t,o){var a=t.createElement("script");a.src="https://ad.vidverto.io/vidverto/js/aries/v1/invocation.js",a.setAttribute("fetchpriority","high");var r=v.top;r.document.head.appendChild(a),v.self!==v.top&&(v.frameElement.style.cssText="width:0px!important;height:0px!important;"),r.aries=r.aries||{},r.aries.v1=r.aries.v1||{commands:[]};var c=r.aries.v1;c.commands.push((function(){var d=document.getElementById("_vidverto-725dc94bb887f000f0b279c49613751c");d.setAttribute("id",(d.getAttribute("id")+(new Date()).getTime()));var t=v.frameElement||d;c.mount("10285",t,{width:720,height:405})}))}(window,document); */ ?>

Dimensons & Outlines

4788 mm
1928 mm
1762 mm
960 liters
2015 liters
86 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
4813 mm
1848 mm
1780 mm
880 liters
2091 liters
80 liters
2005 Land Rover Range Rover Sport
2005 Nissan Pathfinder

Engine

Diesel
8 - V config, 4 valves per cylinder
Bi-Turbo
3630 cc
272 hp
640 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
Diesel
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Turbo
2488 cc
171 hp
403 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
manual gearbox - 6 gears
2184 kg
11.9 s
175 km/h
12.0 l/100km
8.6 l/100km
9.8 l/100km
264 g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

automatic - 6 gears
2645 kg
9.2 s
209 km/h
14.7 l/100km
9.0 l/100km
11.1 l/100km
294 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
automatic - 5 gears
2081 kg
11.8 s
175 km/h
12.9 l/100km
9.1 l/100km
10.5 l/100km
283 g/km

Expenses

6500 EUR
Price from
6000 EUR

Virtual Adviser's™ opinion

Overview

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 diesel engine choice they offer. The first one has a Ford-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 8-cylinder, 32-valves 272hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 171hp engine designed by Nissan.

Safety

The fact that the Nissan 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, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the British car offers a considerable difference of 21% more metal.

Reliability

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Nissan is significantly less fault-prone, when all the models are taken into account. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Land Rover with an average rating of 3.8, and models under the Nissan badge with 4.3 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Range Rover Sport as average reliability-wise, and Pathfinder is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the British car rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.7 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Land Rover is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.7 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 209 kilometers per hour, 34km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 9.8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (29 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 13% difference compared to the British car.


Verdict

Nissan 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 Japanese car offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. From there things take a different direction, with Land Rover outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Nissan. Nevertheless, let's not forget that people have different preferences and needs, so what really counts is your personal feel. I'm only here to help. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.

Check a car by its VIN number

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

47worldwide automotive brands
1.592different vehicle models
2.311engines
14.428specific cars