1994 Ford Aerostar vs. 2009 Land Rover LR2
To start off, 2009 Land Rover LR2 is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1994 Ford Aerostar. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1994 Ford Aerostar would be higher. At 3,192 cc (6 cylinders), 2009 Land Rover LR2 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Land Rover LR2 (231 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 98 more horse power than 1994 Ford Aerostar. (133 HP @ 4600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover LR2 should accelerate faster than 1994 Ford Aerostar.
Because 2009 Land Rover LR2 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1994 Ford Aerostar. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover LR2 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 LR2 (317 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 100 more torque (in Nm) than 1994 Ford Aerostar. (217 Nm @ 2800 RPM). This means 2009 Land Rover LR2 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1994 Ford Aerostar.
Compare all specifications:
| 1994 Ford Aerostar | 2009 Land Rover LR2 | |
| Make | Ford | Land Rover |
| Model | Aerostar | LR2 |
| Year Released | 1994 | 2009 |
| Body Type | Minivan | SUV |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2978 cc | 3192 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | in-line |
| Horse Power | 133 HP | 231 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4600 RPM | 6300 RPM |
| Torque | 217 Nm | 317 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2800 RPM | 3200 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
| Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
| Vehicle Length | 4450 mm | 4500 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1830 mm | 1910 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1860 mm | 1750 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3030 mm | 2670 mm |
