1996 Holden XU 6 vs. 2002 Land Rover Range Rover
To start off, 2002 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Holden XU 6. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Holden XU 6 would be higher.
Because 2002 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1996 Holden XU 6. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2002 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, 1996 Holden XU 6 (515 Nm) has 76 more torque (in Nm) than 2002 Land Rover Range Rover. (439 Nm). This means 1996 Holden XU 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2002 Land Rover Range Rover.
Compare all specifications:
| 1996 Holden XU 6 | 2002 Land Rover Range Rover | |
| Make | Holden | Land Rover |
| Model | XU 6 | Range Rover |
| Year Released | 1996 | 2002 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 282 HP |
| Torque | 515 Nm | 439 Nm |
| Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
| Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
