1966 BMW 2000 vs. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover
To start off, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 43 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 BMW 2000. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 BMW 2000 would be higher. At 4,197 cc (8 cylinders), 2009 Land Rover Range Rover is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover (391 HP @ 5750 RPM) has 290 more horse power than 1966 BMW 2000. (101 HP @ 5500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover should accelerate faster than 1966 BMW 2000. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover weights approximately 1502 kg more than 1966 BMW 2000. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2009 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1966 BMW 2000. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2009 Land Rover Range Rover (560 Nm @ 3500 RPM) has 403 more torque (in Nm) than 1966 BMW 2000. (157 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2009 Land Rover Range Rover will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1966 BMW 2000. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover has automatic transmission and 1966 BMW 2000 has manual transmission. 1966 BMW 2000 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2009 Land Rover Range Rover will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 1966 BMW 2000 | 2009 Land Rover Range Rover | |
| Make | BMW | Land Rover |
| Model | 2000 | Range Rover |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2009 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1991 cc | 4197 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 101 HP | 391 HP |
| Engine RPM | 5500 RPM | 5750 RPM |
| Torque | 157 Nm | 560 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 3000 RPM | 3500 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 89 mm | 86 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 80 mm | 90.3 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.5:1 | 9.1:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1130 kg | 2632 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4500 mm | 4980 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 2200 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1940 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2560 mm | 2890 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 54 L | 88 L |
