2000 BMW Z3 vs. 2009 Land Rover LR2
To start off, 2009 Land Rover LR2 is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 BMW Z3. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 BMW Z3 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 (227 HP @ 6300 RPM) has 60 more horse power than 2000 BMW Z3. (167 HP @ 6100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Land Rover LR2 should accelerate faster than 2000 BMW Z3.
Because 2009 Land Rover LR2 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2000 BMW Z3. 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 (234 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 24 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 BMW Z3. (210 Nm @ 3500 RPM). This means 2009 Land Rover LR2 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 BMW Z3.
Compare all specifications:
2000 BMW Z3 | 2009 Land Rover LR2 | |
Make | BMW | Land Rover |
Model | Z3 | LR2 |
Year Released | 2000 | 2009 |
Body Type | Convertible | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2171 cc | 3192 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 6 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 167 HP | 227 HP |
Engine RPM | 6100 RPM | 6300 RPM |
Torque | 210 Nm | 234 Nm |
Torque RPM | 3500 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 80 mm | 84 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 72 mm | 96 mm |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.8:1 | 10.8:1 |
Top Speed | 220 km/hour | 199 km/hour |
Drive Type | Rear | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Width | 1750 mm | 1910 mm |