2002 Land Rover Range Rover vs. 1965 Lincoln Continental
To start off, 2002 Land Rover Range Rover is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Lincoln Continental. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Lincoln Continental would be higher. At 7,048 cc (8 cylinders), 1965 Lincoln Continental is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1965 Lincoln Continental (284 HP @ 4600 RPM) has 109 more horse power than 2002 Land Rover Range Rover. (175 HP @ 4000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1965 Lincoln Continental should accelerate faster than 2002 Land Rover Range Rover. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Land Rover Range Rover weights approximately 34 kg more than 1965 Lincoln Continental.
Because 2002 Land Rover Range Rover is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 1965 Lincoln Continental. 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.
Compare all specifications:
| 2002 Land Rover Range Rover | 1965 Lincoln Continental | |
| Make | Land Rover | Lincoln |
| Model | Range Rover | Continental |
| Year Released | 2002 | 1965 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2926 cc | 7048 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 175 HP | 284 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4000 RPM | 4600 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
| Vehicle Weight | 2440 kg | 2406 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4960 mm | 5500 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 2200 mm | 2000 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1830 mm | 1370 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2800 mm | 3210 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 100 L | 90 L |
