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 6-cylinder, 24-valves 190hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 171hp engine designed by Nissan.

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 11% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Nissan is significantly less fault-prone, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, 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.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the British car rank it on average as 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.7 out of 5.

Nissan is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.8 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 175 kilometers per hour, 18km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 9.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (29 mpg), in combined cycle.

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 offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Nissan. 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. 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.